Tian Bahtiar to resume work as a journalist after acquittal

Jakarta (ANTARA) – Former television crew Tian Bahtiar says he will return to active work as a journalist after being acquitted of three corruption cases in which he was accused of obstructing law enforcement. ‘With this decision, the space for press freedom must be safeguarded and protected within the applicable legal framework,’ Tian said after the hearing at the Corruption Court of the Central Jakarta District Court, in the early hours of Wednesday. As a journalist who has been active for 30 years, he expressed thanks to the Coalition of Press People and civil society who filed amicus curiae, or ‘friends of the court’, and offered support during the trial. In the same session, Tian’s advocate, Didi Supriyanto, described the decision of the Panel of Judges of the Corruption Court at PN Jakpus Jakarta Pusat as a ‘pure acquittal’, because the panel found no criminal elements proven in the indictment. ‘That the panel acquitted the defendant of the charges (pure acquittal) based on the legal facts disclosed during the trial,’ Didi said. He said that Tian’s acts constituted journalistic activity, which falls under the Press Law. Therefore, charging Tian with obstruction of justice is seen as criminalising journalistic work. Didi hopes the decision will become an important precedent so that law enforcement officers no longer use obstruction of investigation provisions to trap journalists performing their duties. He also emphasised that under the new Criminal Procedure Code provisions, a prosecutor cannot lodge a legal remedy against a pure acquittal, which is part of protecting the defendant’s human rights. In the case, Tian was acquitted alongside two other defendants, namely activist or head of the buzzer team Adhiya Muzakki and advocate Junaedi Saibih. The three corruption cases charged had their investigations impeded by the three defendants, namely tin ore governance, export of crude palm oil (CPO) and sugar import. The three defendants were initially suspected of devising programmes and content intended to shape negative public opinion about the handling of those three cases. However, in its decision, the Panel of Judges found no malicious intent or unlawful nature in Tian’s actions, because Tian was simply carrying out his journalistic duties by producing reports. If the reporting was perceived as negative, the Panel of Judges argued that this was a matter of perspective or point of view, not a truth that can be measured by criminal law. As for Adhiya’s actions, the Panel of Judges said that his social media posts could not be regarded as malicious intent because Adhiya conducted them after obtaining consent from advocate Marcella Santoso. Thus, if further evidence is to be produced, it could be done in a normal criminal trial, not a corruption case. Regarding Junaedi, the Panel of Judges determined that organising seminars, even with negative narratives, is part of non-litigation defence outside the court. It was stated that as long as the seminars are conducted in accordance with applicable regulations, they are not actions with unlawful nature. Moreover, Junaedi has been shown not to have known, approved, or participated in producing news that was negative toward the Attorney General’s Office, whether in mainstream media or on social media, as referred to by the prosecutor.