Judicial review urged for broadcast bill
Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
The Indonesian Press and Broadcasting Society (MPPI) is planning to file for a Supreme Court judicial review of the broadcasting bill on the grounds that it contains articles that run contrary to the 1945 Constitution.
The bill, which was approved by the special House of Representatives committee charged with its deliberation on Thursday, is scheduled for endorsement on Nov. 25 during a House plenary session.
"As soon as the bill is signed by the President, we will ask the Supreme Court to review it," MPPI chairman Leo Batubara told The Jakarta Post on Friday.
The MPPI and other broadcasting associations had submitted their views to both the special committee and State Minister for Communications and Information Syamsul Mu'arif, but they were not acted upon.
Meanwhile, the secretary-general of the Indonesian Television Association (ATVSI), Nurhadi Purwosaputro, and the news director of Trans TV television, Satrio Arismunandar, both expressed disappointment with certain articles in the bill.
Leo claimed that the role of the government in broadcasting as stipulated in the broadcasting bill was not in line with Article 28 (f) of the 1945 Constitution.
This article says that everyone has the right to communicate, to receive information, to develop their personalities and social environment, and to seek, obtain, possess, store, analyze and disseminate information using all available means.
Referring to Article 28 (f), Leo stressed that obtaining information was a public right. Therefore, the government should not interfere in this area.
The broadcasting bill provided ample room for the government to meddle in broadcasting affairs through 12 articles.
Besides being repugnant to the Constitution, Leo said that the imposition of what he described as censorship by the bill ran contradictory to the ethos of the state, which was based upon the rule of law.
Leo said that this showed that both legislators and the minister were more interested in a power-orientated state rather than a law-orientated state.
"The imposition of censorship implies an effort to strengthen the powerholders. This constitutes unwarranted intervention. We should strengthen the legal system by adopting a code of conduct instead of censorship," Leo added.
After the agreement on Thursday, the minister and the legislators acknowledged there were contentious articles in the bill.
But, they claimed that the public would be able to have their views heard by the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI), a regulatory body to be set up later.
Commenting on this, Leo simply said that he had frequently submitted input to the special committee during the deliberation process, but none of it had been accommodated.
"Therefore, I think it's impossible that the KPI will listen to our views," he said.
Meanwhile, Nurhadi and Satrio were also concerned about the article which bans television stations from broadcasting nationwide.
They said that this would entail major losses from the business point of view as they had already invested heavily in building relay stations in remote areas.