Judiciary facing hard task taming freedom of expression
----------------------------------------------------------------
A string of recent trials mirrors difficulties facing the judiciary in coping with mounting demands for freedom of expression. Political scientist Ariel Heryanto takes a close look at these trials. ----------------------------------------------------------------
SALATIGA, Central Java (JP): The credibility of the Indonesian judiciary has been the target of enormous public criticism these days. Small wonder street demonstrations and violence have become more and more appealing to the weak and disillusioned as a way to vent their frustrations.
Although the judiciary has had a tarnished image for more than two decades, only very recently has the general helplessness and public apathy been so obvious.
As recently as last year, when the Dili court deprived defendant Xanana Gusmao of his right to present a defense plea, public uproar had been minimal. However, things have changed dramatically since two separate but equally controversial trials in Surabaya and Jakarta took place.
The gallery in a Surabaya court room where a tax restitution fraud case was being tried raised their hands, waved money in the air and expressed their feeling that the court functionaries had failed to be impartial.
Last month, members of the General Attorney office and Supreme Court were engaged in a mud slinging match of mutual suspicion and public denouncement.
Tortures
And no trial in the past two decades has caused such a deep public anger in the country and overseas like the one now in progress in Surabaya. Of course, this is the murder trial of Marsinah, a female labor activist who has been turned into a martyr.
A prestigious human rights award has been named after her. The defendants and key witnesses in the case had retracted their previous testimonies on the grounds that they had been given under duress and the most inhuman tortures.
In Jakarta, a series of student activist trials have met with a different response. The defendants, who were arrested when they launched peaceful demonstrations at the parliament, are being tried on charges of expressing hatred, hostility towards the President and for defaming his good name.
These trials appear to have repeated what happened to student activists in Jakarta (1989), Bandung (1989), Yogyakarta (1989- 1990), and Semarang (1993) in the wake of a revival of student radicalism.
Some observers saw these trials as a deterrent to student activists. However, all of the past trials had actually served to provoke the student defendants and their fellow radicals to take an even stronger stance.
Defense pleas were prepared and included arguments based on evidence along with also with condemnations and counter-charges against their accusers.
But in the end, they lost the legal battle. No defendant in any of these political trials has been declared not guilty.
Legal battle
Apparently, having no more confidence in the law, student defendants and their supporters have thrown out the idea of fighting a legal battle or preparing a serious defense. Instead, they decided to transform the legal proceedings into an aesthetic spectacle and political festivity. The trial of Nuku Soleiman, ending last February, is a good case in point.
From the outset Nuku had no illusions of a fair and impartial trial. He entered the first session in casual outfit and plastic scandals. In subsequent proceedings, he and his defense counsel often walked out of the courtroom in protest. Fellow activists attending the trial made all sorts of naughty remarks both inside as well as outside the courtroom.
The disavowal reached a climax on the day of the verdict was passed when crowds of young strangers appeared in the court building to meet Nurhayati and Sihol, two judges in Nuku's trial.
It turned out that these young people came to look for jobs listed in two fake advertisements. Then an ambulance arrived at the building intending to rescue Nurhayati, as requested by someone who identified himself as Sihol. Before long a Pizza Hut delivery service entered the scene, adding to the spectacle.
More gimmicks of original imagination have been performed in the Jakarta trials of 21 students activists now in progress. In attempt to repair the credibility of these trials, the court has allowed prominent dissidents to testify as expert-witnesses.
It is amazing that such prominent government critics such as Ali Sadikin, Abdurrahman Wahid, Sabam Sirait, Sri Bintang Pamungkas and Franz Magnis-Suseno were given permission to speak. But this sort of thing tends to occur when the judiciary has lost its credibility. Hence, a question arises whether or not this is a belated attempt to win back people's confidence?
Many dissidents have decided to shift the battle outside the court room. Some speculate that on the day of the verdict of these trials we will see a second Malari (the biggest demonstration in New Order era in Jakarta in January 1974).
In the neighboring country the Philippine president and his critics are now waging a legal battle over the running of state- sponsored lottery.
In Indonesia activists won such a battle against the government not in the court but in street demonstrations.
The writer is a lecturer at the post-graduate program at the Satya Wacana Christian University in Salatiga.