Is U.S. legal system unjust?

I note with concern that your Dec. 21, 1999 front page carried an article that under duress from the U.S. government, Indonesia has been forced to suspend all corruption investigations involving the state electricity company PLN and its contracted power station suppliers.

According to the Asian Wall Street Journal of Dec. 21, 1999, the U.S. ambassador sees this as progress. Are we now to understand that it is official U.S. policy to encourage state corruption? Since when does the U.S. ambassador become responsible for Indonesian law and for superseding the laws of the United States of America?

Although potential significant breaches of Indonesian and U.S. law (including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and SEC violations in regards to share transfers) are alleged, involving many millions of U.S. dollars, the U.S. government or its embassy in Jakarta has not as yet referred a single case to the justice department, why not?

After the strenuous intervention of the World Bank in the Bank Bali scandal, can we expect a similar vigorous intervention in the PLN cases, again if not, then why not?

Taking into account the perhaps-justified concerns of U.S. multinational chances of success in an Indonesian court, I would suggest that the U.S. justice department takes over the cases and that they are litigated in the U.S., with any damages being transferred back to the Indonesian authorities. I am sure the current U.S. ambassador and World Bank country manager would wholeheartedly support such a "fair" position, or is the U.S. legal system "unjust" as well?

COLLIN SINCLAIR

Perth, Australia