Legal wrangling set to continue
By T. Sima Gunawan
JAKARTA (JP): Legal problems related to the June 1993 banning of Tempo weekly continue to linger.
Five separate lawsuits were filed in connection to the government's decision to ban the popular magazine. None have been settled.
On May 3, 1995, the Jakarta State Administrative Court, which handled two lawsuits on the revocation of Tempo's publishing license, ruled in favor of the magazine's former chief editor, Goenawan Mohamad, and its former staff members. Court chief Benjamin Mangkoedilaga said that Minister of Information Harmoko's decision based on decree No.01/1984 on the revocation of publishing licenses contradicted the higher Press Law. Therefore, the court ordered Harmoko to reissue the license.
The Press Law No. 21/1982 does not allow the banning of national mass media.
The case, however, is not over as Harmoko stated he will appeal the decision in the State Administrative High Court.
Five days after the administrative court reached the verdict, the Central Jakarta District Court turned down the Rp 936 million damage claim filed by 39 former Tempo employees. Presiding judge Leo Hutagalung said that the case was out of the court's jurisdiction. He argued that the case should be heard by an administrative court because it was caused by a ministerial decree.
The plaintiff's defense team stated immediately after the decision that they would appeal.
Two other lawsuits were filed against the minister of information regarding his controversial decree revoking the publishing licenses.
As many as 121 Indonesian journalists and 972 people who are against the bannings of Tempo, DeTik and Editor, urged the Supreme Court to review the decree.
They took the class actions on the grounds that the Supreme Court has the authority to examine government regulations that are considered inappropriate.
Both suits were registered with the Central Jakarta District Court on Nov. 11, 1994.
The first judicial review case in Indonesian press history was brought forward in 1992 by Surya Paloh, owner of the Prioritas daily which was banned in 1987. He asked the court to review Harmoko's decree No.01/1984, which was used by the government to justify the newspaper's closing.
The Supreme Court refused to hear the case in June 1993, because they said the suit wasn't filed properly. The court only then issued regulation No.1/1993 on the filing procedures for judicial review suits.
Even though Surya Paloh could re-file his suit, he decided not to continue the legal battle. What was more important was to simplify the procedures to get a publishing license, Paloh said during an interview with Matra monthly magazine last April.
Tempo's judicial review suits were the first to arise after the Supreme Court issued regulation No.1/1993 on judicial review suits.
The Central Jakarta District Court, which apparently didn't understand the judicial review procedures, summoned the plaintiffs on Nov. 23, according to one of the plaintiffs' lawyers, Rita Serena Kolibonso.
"They later corrected the mistake through another letter dated Dec. 2," she said.
Rita, a lawyer of the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute, clarified that only the Supreme Court, not the district court, has the authority to summon both plaintiffs and defendants if necessary.
Considering the importance of the case, she called on the Supreme Court to hold a public hearing, even though there was no obligation for the court to do so.
The Supreme Court has only contacted the plaintiffs' lawyers once, on Feb. 20, when the court sent the lawyers a letter acknowledging that it had received their law suit files and Harmoko's response.
"We have not received any more information about the case since," Rita said.
Harmoko was represented by 11 lawyers from the legal bureau of the Ministry of Information and the Attorney General's Office. The lawyers argued that decree No.01/1984 didn't contradict the Press Law No.4/1982. The law states that there shouldn't be any banning or censorship of the national press. According to Harmoko's lawyers, revoking a business license was different from banning a magazine or censoring it.
The Jakarta State Administrative Court has stated that the decree contradicts the press law, but the Supreme Court, of course, has the final say. Whatever the ruling, it will be a milestone in the history of both the Indonesian press and judiciary.