The Ba'asyir verdict

As could have been expected, given the amount of strain and pressure that preceded it, the verdict that was read out on Tuesday at the Central Jakarta District Court did not please everyone -- or, to be more precise, it probably pleased no one. Nevertheless, in its own way, the lengthy text that was capped by the controversial decision can be regarded as having some merits of its own in the fight against international terrorism.

As has been widely reported both here and abroad, in a nutshell, the verdict acquitted Muslim cleric Abu Bakar Ba'asyir of charges that he had led and organized Jamaah Islamiyah (JI) -- that shadowy group classified as a "terrorist organization" by the UN -- in an attempt to overthrow the government through a series of bomb attacks in Indonesia, and that he had plotted to assassinate Megawati Soekarnoputri when she was still vice president.

However, the panel of five judges pronounced him guilty of aiding and abetting treason by supporting JI's aim of establishing an Islamic state in Indonesia. The judges also found him guilty of minor immigration violations and sentenced the frail and aging cleric to four years in prison. Unlike the same court's ruling against House of Representatives Speaker Akbar Tandjung -- who was pronounced guilty and sentenced to three years in prison, but is free pending appeal -- Ba'asyir's sentence was effective immediately.

Ba'asyir immediately declared that he would appeal the verdict, while the prosecution said it was considering an appeal -- it had asked for a 15-year sentence.

It is not surprising that various parties have since expressed their disappointment at the verdict -- all for different reasons. Some observers opined that the sentence was too lenient; others saw it as having been politically engineered, nothing more than a groundless decision.

If the prosecution could have proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Abu Bakar Ba'asyir was indeed the leader of JI and that JI was responsible for the Bali bombings on Oct. 12, 2002 that killed 202 people, for the JW Marriott Hotel attack on Aug. 5, and the spate of church bombings on Christmas Eve 2000, then indeed the sentence is too lenient.

However, the fact remains that the police failed to prepare and present convincing evidence and credible witnesses, and consequently, the prosecution was unable to build a strong case out of the evidence it had, resting its case largely on the televised testimony of JI suspects detained in Malaysia and Singapore.

Two key witnesses, Omar al-Faruq, allegedly a senior al-Qaeda operative, and Hambali, allegedly the key link between JI and al- Qaeda, were not available to testify for the prosecution, as both are currently in U.S. custody and are being held at unspecified locations.

The question now is, is this a setback for Indonesia's fight against terrorism? Contrary to international perception, apparently it is not. After the Bali bombings last year, Indonesia has made some actual progress, transparent enough for the whole world to see.

With its poorly equipped personnel, limited capacity and not- so-professional force, the Indonesian police have arrested many suspects in a relatively short period of time. Many of these suspects have been brought to court, either as defendants or as witnesses. Some have been convicted, whether convincingly or otherwise.

We have yet to see similar progress in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S. nearly two years ago. Despite its mighty superpower resources, and after having invaded two countries -- Afghanistan and Iraq -- presumably to find those who were responsible for the attacks, the U.S. has yet to detain and take to court those who are responsible.

Considering the weaknesses of the Indonesian judiciary, its highly politicized system and notoriously corrupt officials, Tuesday's verdict can serve as a strong sign that Indonesia will not tolerate terrorism by radical groups in this country.

This nascent democracy does not need any backlash from the U.S. and its allies. What it does need is honest global cooperation in its war against terror.