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