The poor have no access to justice

The poor have no access to justice

It was interesting to read The Jakarta Post's editorial on
Aug. 30, 2000 under the title of Wrong verdict. To the Post, the
fact that Djoko Tjandra, who is obviously an embezzler, has not
been considered a criminal has come as a big surprise. Media
Indonesia, as quoted in the Post's "Other Opinion" column, has
considered it a bad precedent which must be avoided.

From the side of idealism, this view is correct. The mistake
lies in the assumption that a court is a place where one seeks
justice. This assumption, unfortunately, is a long way from
reality.

A court is simply a place where a case is tried. So, when
someone files a case to a court of law, he must realize that the
problem is not how to get justice but, rather, how to win the
case. A justice seeker can only present material legal evidence
and witnesses and hope that justice will follow.

However, someone who wishes to win a case needs to do more. He
must pay a famous lawyer and have enough money to do this as well
as having carefully considered calculations. He must realize that
honor needs money, or jer basuki mawa bea, as the Javanese say.

Karl Marx really drove it home when he said that justice never
takes sides with the poor because the law is drawn up and upheld
for and by the elite. The poor have neither money nor political
and bureaucratic access. Therefore, the community prefers to
settle a case amicably through deliberations or by means of a
people's court. As for the weak, they will simply have to wait
for God's court in heaven.

What is of greater alarm is the international community's
refusal to believe the result of a trial of those involved in the
East Timor case. Mounting international pressure will be a heavy
burden to Indonesian diplomats. We indeed have the obligation to
protect all citizens, but at the same time we are obliged to
uphold justice for everyone.

M. IKHSAN

Jakarta