Tue, 20 May 2003

'Tempo' hearing delayed

The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The police, facing a lawsuit for failing to prevent an assault on Tempo journalists, also failed to attend a hearing on the case on Monday, forcing the court to delay it.

Presiding judge Iskandar Tjakke adjourned the session until June 2, when lawyers for the plaintiffs will deliver their suit.

A civil prosecution was filed by the Association of Independent Journalists (AJI) against the national police chief, the city police chief, the Central Jakarta police chief and the Menteng police chief.

It centered on an assault on several Tempo journalists during a violent demonstration staged on March 8 by some 200 supporters of tycoon Tomy Winata over an article in the weekly that implicated Tomy in a recent fire that had razed Tanah Abang market here. Some of the protesters later took the journalists to the Central Jakarta police station to settle the case. While at the police station, the harassment against the journalists continued while the police did nothing to stop it.

Monday's session was scheduled to start at 9 a.m., but judge Iskandar did not open it until 11:50 a.m. -- simply to announce that the hearing was adjourned.

The judge said that the court had sent the summons to the national police chief, the city police chief, the Central Jakarta police chief and the Menteng police chief.

One of the lawyers, Azas Tigor Nainggolan, complained about the absence of the accused, and protested the fact that the court was almost three hours behind schedule.

"We call upon the panel of judges to be consistent. We were invited to attend the hearing at 9 a.m., so we expect it to start by 10 a.m. at the latest. But today, we have had to wait until 11:50," Azas said. "Next time, please be on time."

In response to the protest, Iskandar said that the beginning of the hearing depended on both parties.

"If both parties arrived before 9 a.m., we could start (at that time)," he said.

The courts here are notorious for "rubber time", as court sessions are often conducted far behind scheduled times, without any explanation for the lateness.

In its lawsuit, AJI said the police had violated Law No.2/2002 on the Police, which stipulates their duty to maintain security and order, enforce the law and protect and serve the public.

The plaintiffs added that the police were also accused of violating article 7 (d) of Law No.9/1998 on the Freedom of Speech about the obligation of government apparatus to provide security to guarantee freedom of speech, and Press Law No. 40/1999 which guarantees press freedom.