Soeharto vs Time?

Unless Soeharto and his lawyers are bluffing, we could soon have an intriguing trial pitting the former president against the New York-based Time magazine. Wherever the lawyers chose to file their lawsuit, Jakarta or New York, Soeharto vs Time surely would generate a lot of interest, not just here, but also abroad. Imagine, the former despot of the world's fourth largest country suing one of America's most renowned and reputable magazines. If such a court case did not grab headlines across the world, it would at least provide irresistible material for writers like John Grisham.

Soeharto and his lawyers have threatened to take criminal and civil action against the magazine for its "Suharto Inc." cover story in its Asia edition published last week. The magazine said Soeharto and his family amassed a US$15 billion fortune during his 32 years in power, much of which they had stashed abroad.

Soeharto denies owning any assets abroad, but the denial does not extend to his children's possessions. Time claims to have proof that the $9 billion in funds transferred from a Swiss bank to an Austrian bank moments after Soeharto's resignation in May last year belongs to the former first family. Soeharto also denied the allegation. His lawyers called the article libelous and Soeharto described it as "cruel slander". Time says it stands by its story.

No longer president, Soeharto is not necessarily powerless, especially if his purported wealth truly exists. The former first family certainly have the resources for a lengthy and costly litigation, which this case would most likely be. Soeharto, for example, has retained for some time now eight of Indonesia's top lawyers to handle the government's investigation into his wealth.

It is uncertain, however, whether Soeharto and his children are prepared for the barrage of media publicity that such a trial, in Jakarta or New York, would generate. It is less certain whether the Soehartos are prepared to disclose their real wealth, something a court would likely demand in order for them to prove that they did not own any assets abroad. And what if Time has the evidence to back up its story?

If the case does go to trial, it will help bring out the truth about the wealth of Soeharto and his family. In this case, Time would have done Indonesia a great service. The nation has been dismayed, if not bemused, by the melodrama played out by President B.J. Habibie and Attorney General Andi M. Ghalib as they have pretended to go after the wealth of Soeharto and his family these past 12 months. Time has done Ghalib's job, and it has done it better.

A Soeharto vs Time trial in Jakarta also would provide an interesting case study for the Indonesian media on how far investigative journalism is tolerated under the laws of the country. To what extent does the libel law protect the privacy of an individual while ensuring the media has the freedom to do its job in serving the public's interests? Soeharto may not be in power, but he is still an important public figure who should be subject to public scrutiny through the media.

Investigative journalism is a relatively new concept in Indonesia. When Soeharto was in power, few media institutions dared practice investigative journalism because the government could simply close them down at any time. With Soeharto out of the picture and the nation enjoying unprecedented press freedom, a number of magazines which have the resources have begun the practice of in-depth reporting. Irrespective of the fact that Time is an American magazine, an Indonesian trial, if the case reaches that stage, would set a major precedent in the law regarding the practice of journalism in Indonesia.

The American press enjoys stronger protection under its First Amendment. The burden of proof in a U.S. libel case involving a public figure is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. Soeharto, for example, would have to prove that he and his family did not own any wealth abroad, that he was not corrupt and that he did not allow his children to profit from his office. Even if he could prove all that, he also would have to prove that there was a malicious intent on the part of Time in printing its allegations.

The only benefit Soeharto would enjoy by filing the lawsuit in the United States is that more and more plaintiffs have been awarded damages in libel suits in the U.S. in recent years. This is because libel cases are tried by a jury, and recent decisions by juries, to some extent, reflect increasing public animosity toward the American press. It is, however, questionable whether an American jury would be sympathetic toward Soeharto.

We still have to wait and see whether Soeharto vs Time ever sees the light of the day, in Jakarta or New York. Time has already called Soeharto's bluff and now the ball is in his and his lawyers' court. One thing is certain, a trial is in the best interests of the nation, and of a free press in Indonesia.