Law professor says student protest not criminal act
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)