Press impartiality in Aceh

The information disclosed by new media watchdog Aceh News Watch on Wednesday that most national newspapers and television stations had failed to practice the very basic media principles of impartiality and coverage of both sides in a conflict in their reportage of the war in Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam (NAD) surprises no one.

According to the findings obtained by the NGO by monitoring five television stations and 13 major newspapers, the press reportage of the war in NAD depends heavily on information supplied by the Indonesian Military (TNI) and National Police (Polri). The television stations used the military version of incidents 108 times and those supplied by the police 46 times. In comparison, those stations quoted the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) only 16 times. As for the printed media, the newspapers quoted military sources 33 times and police sources nine times, while GAM sources were quoted only five times.

The question is whether this failure to abide by the fundamental credo of the media is caused merely by technical difficulties in covering the government's enemy in the war, which is GAM, or because they had to meet government demands not to provide any access to GAM for the sake of the Unitary State of Indonesia (NKRI).

Apart from that there is also the fear that the media does truly share the government's stance that GAM should not be given a chance to convey its version of the war, because the fate of the unitary state is at stake. But who actually has the right to claim that the state is in fatal danger? Clearly, not the military or the government only, but the nation as a whole.

It is not our intention to blame the television stations and the press for depending so heavily on the security forces because they are facing a very difficult situation, and that includes the responsibility to guarantee the safety of their reporters on the battlefield. Journalists who cover the war face the threats of warfare when they make contact with the rebels. The names of media organizations and journalists who have faced the consequences of their defiance against the security forces, have also been reported by the media. The rebels should be equally blamed for the chaos because even until this day, they are still holding the RCTI television crew members hostage.

Whatever the reasons for this partial coverage may be, biased and one-sided reports on anything not only betray one of the most fundamental principles of a free press society, they also deceive the public, which has the right to get accurate and fair information.

There is no guarantee that closing media access to the rebels will ensure the success of the joint operation in NAD to eradicate the rebellion and stamp out the roots of the insurgency in that province. By giving a chance for the rebels to air their version of the war, the public will get more balanced information about the source of the war and the public can get closer to the truth behind the war in NAD.

The security forces, for their part, can benefit from reports about GAM. For instance, whenever claims arise that Indonesian soldiers have committed gross human rights abuses, the TNI can use this GAM information to check out the allegation and, if accurate, to punish those who are responsible for the crimes.

We do agree, though, that the unity of the Republic of Indonesia should be maintained. We also wholeheartedly concur with the view that armed rebellions must not be tolerated. We, the media, must also play a role in securing the unity of this Republic, but not a unity that is based on one version of the conflict only.

The U.S.-led war on Iraq, for example, could serve as an example. Many sections of the American media, such as CNN, were trapped in the nationalistic euphoria that prevailed in the U.S. before the war and so, by using only their government's version of the war, many Americans ignored their role as self-proclaimed champions of press freedom. They believed that Saddam Hussein must be toppled because his weapons of mass destruction and his support for terrorism were seen as an immediate threat to their country and the world. So many parties in the U.S. media had to lick what they had spit out.

We hope that we can learn from the American media's experience. They enthusiastically supported the war, only to realize that they had to pay dearly for their blundering choice. We believe that fairer coverage on NAD will help the nation to end the suffering of its people. The media itself is expected to be mature enough to make its judgment on NAD. Talking about such bitter facts on NAD may upset us now, but for the sake of the Acehnese, the true facts should be disclosed in order to find out the truth.