Old debate on press licensing raging again

Old debate on press licensing raging again

JAKARTA (JP): The government's plan to revise the 1982 Press
Law has received a warm welcome but the long-standing
disagreements over the controversial ministerial decree on
publication licensing remain.

Andi Muis, a law professor at Hasanuddin University in
Ujungpandang, hailed the government's goodwill but suggested that
it consider people's demands to abolish the decree on licensing
if it is to bring the Press Law into line with the broadcasting
bill passed last week.

"There are inconsistencies between the law and the ministerial
decree concerning banning of newspapers," Muis told The Jakarta
Post over the weekend.

"Allowing the government to ban publications without judicial
procedures violates two articles contained in the Press Law," he
added.

Under the 1984 information ministerial decree, a ban could be
imposed on publications for either administrative or content
offenses.

While Article 4 of the Press Law says that no censorship or
bans shall be applied to the National Press. Article 15 refers to
individual, not institutional, responsibility when it comes to
penalties taken against press offenses.

"It's unfair based on the law that a publication company can
be closed down because of an individual's fault," Muis said.

Minister of Information Harmoko said last Wednesday after
announcing the need to bring the 1982 law into line with the
broadcasting bill that the government would maintain the disputed
decree.

Since its issuance 12 years ago, the decree has claimed the
lives of at least five major publications: Sinar Harapan,
Prioritas, Tempo, DeTik and Editor.

Muis said that the revised press law should follow in the
footsteps of the broadcasting bill which suggests court
settlements to any offenses committed by broadcasters.

However, Muis tried to be more accommodating with the
government's insistence on upholding the publication licensing
decree.

"If the government refused to totally overhaul the decree, it
could relinquish its authority to close down publications for
violations in editorial content," Muis said.

According to Muis, the government should loosen its control
over the press since the job is already done by the Criminal
Code.

Separately, Secretary-General of the Jakarta branch of the
Indonesian Journalists Association Marah Sakti Siregar said that
an inclusion of judicial procedures into the renewed law would be
"encouraging".

But he defended the publication licensing policy, saying that
Indonesian people are not sufficiently mature and educated to
exercise social control over a liberal press.

"I cannot imagine how chaotic our society would become if
everybody is free to publish or disseminate information," said
Siregar, who is also the chief editor of Tiras weekly magazine.

He referred as an example to the October religious riot in
Situbondo, East Java, which flared up following rumors that a
defendant charged with blasphemy against Islamic teaching took
refuge in a church.

"Our society is too sensitive to religious, ethnic and racial
issues. The licensing decree may no longer be necessary when all
Indonesians have at least a high school education," Siregar said.

The abolition of the publication licensing authority would
also leave the government toothless, according to Siregar.

Another mass communication expert, Novel Ali of the Semarang,
Central Java-based, Diponegoro University, threw his weight
behind the revision of the Press Law.

"There are a lot of things that could be inserted in the new
law, particularly the cancellation of publication licensing,"
Novel said. "Such a decree is malevolent to the principle of
justice."

Novel, however, was skeptical about whether the absence of
publication licensing would end the government's sweeping control
over the press.

"External censorship through telephone calls from the
authorities and other forms of restriction have prevailed for
ages in the national press," Novel said.

One of Novel's colleagues, Susilo Utomo, said that the revised
press law should encourage the use of judicial procedures and
other means to resolve cases involving the press.

"The right to answer in court has not worked as expected. This
should be the center of discussions on the new version of the
Press Law," Susilo said. (har/amd)