No trial by the press in Indonesia, says expert

No trial by the press in Indonesia, says expert

JAKARTA (JP): Judges' verdicts are often influenced by
economics or pressure from authorities but not by the press,
legal experts said yesterday.

Luhut M.P Pangaribuan, director of the Jakarta Legal Aid
Institute, said the term, "trial by press," only existed in the
Anglo-Saxon judicial system.

"We have not adopted that system, so the terminology is
unknown here," he said.

On Thursday, Amir Syamsudin, a lawyer in a highly publicized
Ecstasy case, said the "cruel" four-year jail term handed down to
his client had been strongly influenced by public opinion.

When the prosecutor urged the court early this month to
sentence the defendant to five years in jail, Amir said the
sentencing request was heavy because of the great public
attention toward the case which had been caused by extensive
media coverage.

Luhut said the coverage had not directly influenced the
judges' decision, but it had indirectly.

"I'm not saying that it did not influence the judges' or
prosecutor's decision, because everyone who was bombarded by the
coverage was eventually affected," he said.

But, he said, media coverage had never influenced him as a
lawyer.

Henry Yosodiningrat, another of Zarina's three lawyers, who
has been involved in many highly publicized cases, was of the
same opinion.

He said judges' decisions were usually influenced by factors
other than media coverage.

But Henry questioned the judge's sentencing in the case over
possession of thousands of Ecstasy pills.

"I'm not sure whether it was influenced by public opinion, but
something unusual happened behind the verdict," he said.

He said the media had had a positive affect on his client's
image.

"In the Zarina case, I was initially worried that the court's
decision would be influenced by the continuous reporting by a lot
of media. But it turned out to advantage us because people began
to show sympathy toward my client," he said.

Ashadi Siregar, director of the Yogyakarta-based Institute of
Research, Education and Publication, said that trial by press
only occurred when reporters' coverage led the public to conclude
that a person was innocent or guilty.

"It can also happen when the media writes stories on cases
outside the judicial process," he said.

Ashadi said that balanced reporting involved simple reports on
what happened in court hearings. "Reporters should not ask for
statements from judges, prosecutors or lawyers outside the
sessions," he said.

He said the media could be exploited to affect the outcome of
cases. He said a lawyer could pay a journalist to write or
broadcast his or her side of story.

Ashadi said that when reporters emphasized one side of a case
-- such as only interviewing lawyers -- they affected public
opinion.

"Prosecutors or lawyers would say a trial by press had
occurred if public opinion was powerful enough to influence the
trial process," he said.

Ashadi said there had been many trials by press if this meant
the media had affected public opinion, but it was not out of
proportion.

"The term was taken from a foreign judicial system, in which
jurors decide the verdict, and jurors are common people who know
little about law and are probably easily influenced," he said.

This is why, he said, jurors were isolated during trials.

"But here," he said, "we have no such system."

The question was whether judges' decisions were impartial. "I
question their morality and impartiality," he said. (12)