Nusakambangan:

Nusakambangan: A resort or jail?

In the past everybody was horrified upon hearing the word Nusakambangan, which reminded people of Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay.

Nusakambangan prison, in Cilacap, Central Java, was established for hard core criminals; the most barbaric murderers and the wildest drug traffickers.

But, Nusakambangan in the past was much different from Nusakambangan today.

As a cold-blooded criminal, Tommy Soeharto deserves to be sent to Nusakambangan. He has also demonstrated his notable reputation -- as a criminal -- when he escaped justice.

Nusakambangan has become a friendly prison, especially since 'Bob' Hasan, a timber tycoon crony of former president Soeharto, was sent there two-years ago.

Bob has spent "a small amount" from his own purse to repair the prison's infrastructure. He has repaired the prison's mosque, established a sports fields and injected working capital for a craft workshop. He has also funded repairs to the boats traveling between the prison and Cilacap.

The result is that Bob Hasan is granted special treatment. He gets a special room, separated from other inmates for his generosity.

From the correctional institution point of view, what Bob Hasan has done looks positive. The question is if is it really allowed?

Isn't the substantial purpose of a prison the withdrawal of civilian rights from the inmates? Is a prisoner allowed to buy his or her civil rights when he or she is serving the jail term? What about equal justice for all irrespective of wealth?

Nusakambangan will likely be more attractive with Tommy Soeharto's being there. It is easy to predict that Tommy will join in "developing the prison".

Let's wait and see what the Minister of Justice and Human Rights Yusril Ihza Mahendra will do about it.

--Koran Tempo, Jakarta

Semen Padang is out of control

The struggle between PT Semen Padang and the central government as the shareholder representing the state has now involved different parties, despite the government's principle approval of a spin-off of Semen Padang's fully-owned subsidiary PT Semen Gresik Tbk.

The spin-off is not easy to realize either, because public investors' consent is yet to be sought, while these investors will surely demand a very high price, thus increasing the burden on the state budget.

This battle gets even more intense following the government's demand for the replacement of Semen Padang's executive board due to its poor performance. This cement company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 104 percent when compared to Semen Gresik's 33 percent and Semen Tonasa's 48 percent.

Semen Padang is rumored to be spending a lot of funds on mobilization of support for its spin-off campaign. Its rapidly swelling expenses for research and development, education and training as well as ceremonies and personnel tours have aroused suspicion.

Amid its financial chaos, Semen Padang owes Rp 500 billion to ABN Amro and Jamsostek (the workers' security company), which reaches maturity this month. Its request for a loan from Bank Mandiri has been partly fulfilled for working capital credit, whereas the investment credit portion is pending the approval of Semen Gresik as shareholder.

Bank Mandiri's delayed disbursement of the remaining portion has led to Semen Padang's protests of government intervention. Worse still, in this crisis the West Sumatra regional administration acts like a shareholder, while in fact this company is state-owned rather than regionally capitalized.

If the West Sumatra community is allowed to prevent the privatization of Semen Padang, can the people of East Java do the same to Semen Gresik? If individual or group power rises above state sovereignty, what do we have a state for?

If the state is not entitled to demand the replacement of a state owned company's executive board, who then is supposed to do it? How long will we let Semen Padang serve individual or group interests?

The euphoria of regional autonomy that ignores national laws not only reflects regional leaders' narrow-mindedness but also worsens the image of the country's already infamous legal certainty.

The Office of the State Minister for State Owned Corporations should therefore take stern and appropriate measures. Any flexible attitude toward rules will undermine the confidence of investors. -- Bisnis Indonesia, Jakarta