With the number of people facing criminal defamation charges in 2009 grabbing headlines, the House of Representatives must prioritize removing articles regulating it out of the criminal code this year, analysts said on Friday.
Hasril Hertanto, a legal expert at the University of Indonesia, told the Jakarta Globe that the current criminal code was based on the colonial Dutch code and had changed very little since.
“Even in the Netherlands and other countries, defamation is no longer a criminal matter but a civil case between two parties,” he said. “The existence of defamation charges in the criminal code poses a threat to freedom of speech and freedom of expression.”
The House is currently planning to amend the age-old code to bring it up to date.
Usman Hamid, chairman of human rights group the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras), also said that removing the articles from the criminal code was long overdue.
“A lot of people have fallen victim to the articles, including activists. Defamation charges are among the most widely used tactics to silence criticism towards the government,” he said. “Even countries like Ghana have eliminated criminal defamation articles to protect democracy.”
Usman, who himself has repeatedly faced criminal defamation charges, pointed that there are at least thirty activists that had been reported to police for slander.
“This is the danger of criminal defamation. In other countries, you need a top notch lawyer to sue someone for defamation, here all you have to do is make the police pursue the case and the rest is taken care off,” he said.
Hendrayana, chairman of the Legal Aid Foundation for the Press, said that the current articles were subjective.
“There is no exact definition or boundaries as to what constitutes defamation, it all falls into the subjectivity of the law enforcers,” he said.
“We have seen in the past that an expert expressing his thoughts in the media can be charged with slander, so can anyone critical of the government.”
However, Hendrayana said that private companies and powerful individuals were most likely to take advantage of the criminal defamation articles and this had been a growing trend last year.
“There are even complaints lashed out to various media organizations for their news articles. There are rights to respond, but the legal standings are much weaker than the code, so it is often set aside,” he said.
Brad Adams, Asian director of Human Rights Watch, said that criminal defamation articles also exist as part of other laws, including the controversial Electronic Transaction and Information (ITE) Law.
“The Indonesian government should revise all laws containing criminal defamation articles because they inhibit free speech, which is among the most basic of human rights,” Adams said.
“We have noted that over the past five years there have been at least 40 new articles on criminal defamation. The situation is worrying and threatens the country’s democracy.”
A number of high profile defamation charges made news during 2009, including one involving businessman Khoe Seng Seng. Khoe was sentenced to six months in prison in July by the East Jakarta District Court for writing a letter to the editor complaining about treatment he received from his landlord, which was published by two national media organizations.
The year however also saw some victories for free speech with the acquital of Prita Mulyasari, who was charged with defamation for sending an e-mail complaining to her friends about the quality of care she received at a private hospital.
“Prita was among the lucky ones because there had been tremendous media coverage and mounting public pressure (over her case),” Hasril said.
“Not everyone is as fortunate as Prita, who had public pressure on her side, so criminal defamation articles must be eliminated.”
Related Articles:
Facebook group thwarts libel case in Indonesia
Facebook Became the New Town Hall and Twitter the Fastest Media
No comments:
Post a Comment