RI's frail press freedom

Bimo Nugroho Director Institute for Studies on the Free Flow of Information (ISAI) Jakarta bimo@isai.or.id

There is much hope that the current press freedom will encourage Indonesia to achieve its aim in becoming a solid civil society. But does this current freedom also liberate the media community?

A Muslim group called the Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia (MMI) recently succeeded in persuading private television stations RCTI and SCTV to stop airing a public service announcement about plurality in Islam in Indonesia.

The MMI expressed strong concern that the announcement went against religious teachings, and that it was Muslims, and not Islam, that were plural.

More recently, the electronic media community is facing the threat of a ban against broadcasting foreign programs, including news, which is the result of a broadcasting bill drawn up by legislators.

All signs of efforts to curb the press need to be watched to avoid a repeat in history of the wounds inflicted on press freedom. Anyone certainly enjoys the freedom to issue a publication. However, the media has grown rapidly during the economic crisis and faces tight competition leading to rigid efficiency and even exploitation of workers, including journalists.

Except for a few media organizations with grants or other kinds of financial support, those who cannot keep up have had to close down. The consequences have been unresolved conflicts within several media companies.

Such conflicts in the media industry have become inevitable, and have worsened the conditions in several media organizations. In the capital alone, numerous disputes of various types have been handled by the union division of the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) in Jakarta and the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute.

Press freedom, which is still in its infancy, has not liberated the media community from the fear of being a target of violence, state regulations or job security.

Capital competition in the information sector has led to the collapse of several media companies. But it has also encouraged new experiments in media; some have failed while others have continued. Creativity is thriving.

Given these contrasting conditions, the task for new non- governmental organizations (NGOs) working in the media is to strengthen the freedom of the press and assure that it continues. Its vulnerability encourages civil society -- represented by these NGOs -- to work on three platforms: Law enforcement, media community empowerment and the empowerment of media consumers.

In law enforcement, there are currently two alliances involved, respectively advocating their version of the broadcasting bill and the bill on freedom to access information.

The legislation process faced by these coalitions is mainly hampered by the authorities in charge of passing laws, the House of Representatives, for several reasons.

First is the many interests contested in the broadcasting bill, such as that of media owners. Second, the lack of knowledge of legislators on the essence of these bills. But there is also the third factor, the lack of experience of activists in working the intricacies of the legislation process in the House. All these reasons may have contributed to the results so far of the controversial articles in the broadcasting bill.

Meanwhile, complaints about the lack of professionalism in the media still abound, and many people could not care less about journalists' job security or the threats made to their lives.

Under these conditions, press freedom is still fragile. It lacks a solid constituent willing to defend it in the face of threats.

The seeds of press freedom that sprouted when former president Soeharto resigned can easily be crushed -- either by capital interest, the political elite or even society, which is exasperated by a lot of insensible news churned out day by day.

The article is based on a paper to be presented at the International Roundtable on Journalism and Freedom of Expression, Sept. 9-12, 2002 in Bali