Ostriches at the border

The state has the responsibility to regulate consular and immigration issues. This country does not want to be a refuge for wanted criminals or people who incite hatred and violence.

The government should do its utmost to ensure that people who propagate illegal activities or unrest are barred entry.

We do not want Osama bin Laden or cohorts of Noordin M. Top, for example, being allowed freedom of entry into this country.

Similarly, it is the onus of the immigration authorities and police to prevent those indicted for criminal offenses from having the opportunity to run away abroad.

On both these points the authorities have a rather miserable track record.

It is evident that terrorist agents have infiltrated our borders, while several corruption and criminal suspects indicted by the Attorney General's Office have easily walked out of this country to evade arrest.

Instead of improving its synergy or facilitating access to people who have legitimate interests in Indonesia, the authorities are going back to their old ways of marking people as either subversive or friendlies.

Apparently old habits do die hard. Entry bans and censorship were common practices during the authoritarian era of the New Order. The authorities at the time would summarily bar entry (or exit for Indonesian citizens) simply because their personal views did not conform to the status quo.

The latest incident involving noted American researcher Sidney Jones is evidence that, despite the rhetoric of democratization, the mind-set of government decision-makers remains trapped in narrow despotic parameters.

Jones, the southeast Asia director of the International Crisis Group (ICG), has been an avid Indonesia-watcher for three decades. Her name began gaining attention as she ruffled the dispositions of authorities here with her work for Amnesty International and later the Asia division of Human Rights Watch.

Three years ago, Jones joined the prominent Brussels-based ICG and began producing a series of strong reports on the suspected terrorist network in the country.

Her work led to her expulsion -- along with fellow ICG member Francesca Lawe-Davies -- in June 2004 after then State Intelligence Agency (BIN) chief A.M. Hendropriyono charged that her reports tarnished the country's image.

The ban was quietly lifted again in mid-2005, thus allowing her to return to the country she considers her second home.

Jones is well known among academic and intellectual circles in Indonesia. Though not everyone agrees with her findings, few would say that she represents a national security threat, as alleged by Minister of Justice Hamid Awaluddin.

Jones is neither a terrorist, nor a preacher of hate. As far as can be recalled, nothing she has said has been geared toward inciting violence or mutiny against the government.

The fact that she has become so influential in shaping public opinion is a matter of common sense as, though sometimes painful to hear, her statements ring a degree of truth.

We have found no grounds for the government preventing her entry into this country.

Our aversion is not simply a crusade on behalf of Jones, but to the manner and oppressive mind-set of the decision-makers. At least two other foreign researchers were also separately deported or barred entry to Indonesia for dubious reasons.

Quietly, the government seems to be withdrawing to ways and means that we believed were beyond a democratic state.

If there are legitimate reasons for barring or expelling these people, the government should provide a thorough explanation, instead of a terse one or two sentences on "national security".

Censorship, travel bans and social engineering are all hallmarks of an authoritarian regime. It is the easy way out: Instead of responding to criticism or problems arising in our society, we censure those who would speak about it.

May we remind Minister Hamid that he -- this nation, for that matter -- are not ostriches who bury their heads in the ground when something is not to their liking.

Far-reaching implications could now arise from this simple act of stupidity.

Will publications now be censored from publishing works by people who are barred from entering the country? If so, what does this say about freedom of expression.

This is a challenge not only facing Indonesia, but many other countries in the world.

What is clear is that, despite the greatness of America as a beacon of democracy and global superpower, we do not want to emulate their new habit of dissuading (and even barring) legitimate academics and researchers whose views may not correspond with those of the administration.