Legal status quo vs reform

A newspaper report on Aug. 12 titled Court rejects indictment of Tempo magazine indicates that the judicial panel chaired by Mulyani was wise and capable of placing Law No. 40/1999 on the press in its proper position.

Judge Mulyani and members of the panel were apparently pioneering the subjugation of colonial legislation to the demand of modern democracy, particularly the dynamics of the national press in anticipating global challenges.

Sadly, this development has not been widely discussed by the press. In fact, two opposing camps have prevailed in Indonesian law, respectively representing status quo and proreform groups.

The status quo camp refuses any change involving the civil and criminal codes, as well as other legal products. To this group, change or reform will deprive it of extra money on top of legal income. Practically, it shares the view of colonial law enforcers that "indigenous defendants" do not deserve true justice.

Tragically, in the political superstructure and infrastructure, many members of the succeeding younger generations have joined the status quo. Meanwhile, legal developments through the print media since the '60s have shown that the reform group's aspirations have been frozen by the ruling regime.

There has been no political will on the part of the Old Order, the New Order or the present government to totally change and reform the legal products of the colonial era. However, we can pin some hopes on the coming leaders resulting from the election runoff on Sept. 20.

SUNGKOWO SOKAWERA, Bandung