Law professor says student protest not criminal act
JAKARTA (JP): A legal expert told the court in one of the Soeharto defamation trials yesterday that the 21 defendants broke no Indonesian laws in an anti-government protest last December.
J.E Sahetapy stressed that the government should not be offended by the posters, slogans and strong-worded statements chanted by the students during the protest.
"The students only lodged their complaints. The authorities should not prosecute them given the fact that the protest did not lead to destruction," he told the Central Jakarta District Court.
Sahetapy, a professor at the Surabaya-based Airlangga University in East Java, testified that a demonstration, as long as it does not lead to public unrest, is a necessary component of democracy. He likened the student protest to other legal political activity.
Another law professor, Philipus Mandiri Hajon, and noted psychologist Sarlito Wirawan also gave expert testimony.
"The authorities should conduct dialog with the students if they agree to call this country a familial one," said Sahetapy.
The 21 were arrested on Dec. 14 at the House of Representatives (DPR) as they demanded that the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) bring Soeharto to account for a number of clashes between the military and civilians.
According to the prosecution, their criticism of the government amounted to defamation of the President, which is a criminal act punishable by up to six years in prison.
The three witnesses testified for the group of six. The defendants are being tried in three separate groups. The two other have four and 11 defendants respectively.
Commenting on the posters accusing DPR members of doing nothing but fulfilling their own interests, Sahetapy said that he has criticized the House but was never reprimanded for his strong remarks published in newspapers.
Slippery concept
He said that he wondered why the students were arrested while other anti-government demonstrations involving civilians ended with no arrests. "I don't understand why it was the students who were arrested," he said.
Sahetapy told the court that defamation is a slippery concept, because it requires individual interpretation. What was an insult years ago is hardly remarked upon today, and what is unjustified slander to one is constructive criticism to another.
He said that defamation could also be in the form of government policy, citing the example of the travel ban imposed on the Petisi 50 dissidents.
Sarlito told the court that people protest to express their dissatisfaction with the course of the nation.
He said that students, if compared to other civilians, have broader vision and greater hope for their ideals, making them easy targets.
Sarlito said protests are a problem if they do not lead to public unrest, and believes that protest was the 21's only available means of expression. It can also be that the students have avoided staging rallies in communicating their points of view, but received no response, he added.
He said that persuasive measures are much better than repressive ones if the government intends to face the students. (par)