The State Administrative Court in Jakarta has rejected a petition by the Alliance of Independent Journalists (Aliansi Jurnalis Independen / AJI) to overturn the Indonesian Film Censorship Board (Lembaga Sensor Film / LSF) ban on the film Balibo. The story is told from the viewpoint of Roger East. Roger East was also murdered on the docks of Dili by Indonesia military forces.
The film says in its promotional material and trailer that it is based on a true story, and suggests in no uncertain terms that the five journalists (Greg Shackleton, Malcolm Rennie, Gary Cunningham, Brian Peters and Tony Stewart) that have come to be known was the Balibo Five were murdered by Indonesian forces invading East Timor.
Recent developments, including a coronial inquiry in the New South Wales Coroner's Court, found that there was sufficient evidence to proceed with further investigations of the perpetrators for committing international crimes of a serious and grievous nature; a war crimes investigation.
In many respects, it is not surprising that the film was banned in the first place, nor is it at all surprising that the ban was upheld by the State Administrative Court. It is not rocket science to understand that there are some things in Indonesia's past that she would not want to revisit, and this is one of them.
It is worth noting that the Australian government is not jumping up and down wanting to know why the film is subject to a ban. This is not surprising either. It is not surprising because Australia was very much complicit in the invasion as it gave the green light for the Indonesians to go in and forcibly integrate Portuguese Timor into the Unitary State of Indonesia. It is also not surprising because it shows how little thought the government of the time gave to the safety of the five journalists on the ground or to Roger East.
Nevertheless, it is surprising that the State Administrative Court has seemingly been asleep at the wheel when it came to hearing the evidence and actually listening to the evidence put forward by the Legal Aid Foundation - Press, legal representatives, of AJI. The State Administrative Court has utilised provisions that were not argued and appear to be poor choices on which to base the decision to uphold the ban and reject the AJI petition. In an important case, such as this one, where there are implications for freedom of speech and freedom of expression, which Indonesia supposedly guarantees, then the judges have a responsibility to get the law right.
On a side note, the film has already been screened in Indonesia despite the ban and no problems have been reported. Indonesian, Timorese, and Australia relations have not irretrievably broken down, there has not been mass rioting on the streets in the places where the film has been shown, and there has not been any inkling of the country degenerating into a state of anarchy. This suggests that, despite the Indonesian Censorship Board's concerns, Indonesian film viewers are more mature and critical of the material they watch than either the Government, the military, or the Censorship Board gives them credit for.
The decision of the Indonesian Film Censorship Board (Lembaga Sensor Film / LSF) to ban the screening of the film Balibo is hardly one for the surprising column. It pretty much was expected, and even more so when the Jakarta Foreign Correspondents Club and the Jakarta International Film Festival (JIFF) both indicated that they were going to screen the film. It certainly was a case of upping the ante.
Well, the LSF responded as expected and banned the film because of the political nature of it, and probably because the film conveys a position that the Indonesian government considers to be lies, a complete fabrication, and a distortion of the truth in the extreme. All of those things mean essentially the same, but they needed repeating in slightly different forms to highlight how seriously the Indonesian government would have been working the LSF to ensure that a ban was forthcoming.
The simple reality here is that the Indonesian position is that the five journalists, who became known as the Balibo Five, were killed in crossfire between Indonesian and Fretilin troops. Whereas, in stark contrast to the official Indonesian position, the film depicts the five being murdered by Indonesian troops under the immediate command of Captain Yunus Yosfiah who went on to reach the rank of general, become a minister, and serve time as a parliamentarian.
These actions were found by the Coroner's Court in NSW to be tantamount to war crimes and worthy of further investigation, and ultimately prosecution.
The Australian Federal Police are committed to completing a war crimes investigation into the deaths of the Balibo Five. So, bilateral tension seems certain to escalate over this matter at some point in the future.
A final point on the issue of censorship. I think the majority of Indonesians are ready enough to cast a critical eye over the film and make judgments as to the content. The idea that the LSF is banning this film because Indonesians are not mature enough to watch and determine for themselves the validity of this film is an insult to all Indonesians.
The latest development in the Balibo Five case is sure to be a tester of the relationship between Australia and Indonesia. The latest development is that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) have decided to launch a war crimes investigation into the events surrounding the deaths of five journalists in the East Timorese township of Balibo. To be fair the enquiry must also include the execution of Roger East as well who was ultimately captured and executed on the foreshore of Dili.
It goes without saying that when the investigation became public knowledge that the Indonesian Department of Foreign Affairs did not respond positively. The Indonesians have considered this case a closed one pretty much from the time it happened. The response went along the lines of case closed and we will not be cooperating in any investigation.
Nevertheless, the AFP were between a rock and a hard place considering the findings of the 2007 NSW Coronial Inquest into the deaths which in essence concluded that there was a case to answer, at least for Yunus Yosfiah, and referred the matter to the AFP for investigation.
For Indonesia, and for many in Australia as well, the idea of letting bygones be bygones and focusing on developing a mutually beneficial relationship going forward is more important. Bygones can never truly be bygones until there is at least a sense that justice has prevailed. The Balibo Five and Roger East have not had any justice and neither have their families. In the end justice might in fact reveal that the Balibo Five were the unfortunate victims of an incident where they were caught in the crossfire between Indonesian and Fretilin troops. If that is the case, then so be it. However, if it turns out that the Balibo Five were the victims of an execution that was aimed at preventing them from getting the story of Indonesia's invasion of East Timor out to the world, then justice would entail that the perpetrators of the execution who remain alive must be brought to trial.
For me, there is no reason why a mature bilateral relationship between Australia and Indonesia cannot survive this investigation. The idea that the era of Soeharto has passed, which would seem pretty obvious now the man is dead, and that Indonesia is a different place to what it was in 1975, albeit true, does not hold water when it comes to justice. What happened in East Timor and the Balibo Five needs to be known, just because Soeharto is dead and Indonesia is a different place does not mean that the truth of these events should be swept under the carpet. The tribunals in Cambodia are testament to the need for justice to be given a chance.
In many ways there are arguments beyond just the Balibo Five that what occurred in East Timor, the now independent Timor Leste, were crimes of such a magnitude that an international tribunal is warranted. There are arguments to be made for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, Even though the genocide of the East Timorese might be debatable and may not be on the scale of the holocaust of the Jews during the second world war, a genocide is a genocide on whatever scale.
The allegations must be pursued until the truth is determined.
I will undoubtedly write on this subject again as it contains all the issues that are important to me both personally and professionally; Australia, Indonesia, and the pursuit of justice.
Here is something that is sure to get under the skin of the members of Commission I of the House of Representatives (DPR) in Indonesia, Balibo. Commission I has responsibility for matters relating to defense, intelligence, foreign affairs, telecommunications, and information. Just about anything remotely related to the Indonesian and Australian bilateral relationship that is probing of Indonesia or her past is dismissed as foreign interference in Indonesians sovereign affairs.
The film Balibo is about five journalists (Greg Shackleton, Tony Stewart, Gary Cunningham, Brian Peters, and Malcolm Rennie) who were either murdered or killed in the cross-fire between Indonesian troops and Timorese rebels. Primarily the focus is on the relationship between Roger East and Jose Ramos Horta. East was later captured and executed, reportedly by firing squad, by Indonesian soldiers. This happened during Indonesia's invasion of the former Portuguese colony that ultimately led to Portuguese Timor being integrated into Indonesia as East Timor.
Aside from the justice that the Balibo Five deserve, Roger East also deserves to receive justice. Journalists must not be cold-bloodedly murdered by invading and occupying forces. More than that, journalists must not be targeted and murdered in the course of pursuing their profession.
This invasion led to the Timorese suffering for the next 24 years at the hands of a greedy colonizer with an insatiable appetite for natural resources and violence. History was only set right with the direct ballot of 1999. Unfortunately, this was not an entirely peaceful transition from colonization to independence.
East Timor has now become the independent Timor Leste.
The film has premiered at the Melbourne International Film Festival where the current Timor Leste president and former rebel leader, Jose Ramos Horta, spoke about his knowledge of the events of 1975. His comments make for interesting reading and are more likely to strain the Timor Leste and Indonesian bilateral relationship than the fact that Australian film makers have gone about making this film.
Interestingly, the Melbourne International Film Festival website has been hacked purportedly by Chinese hackers critical of the festival's decision to screen a film about the violence perpetrated by the Chinese state against the Uighurs. Here is the link (not sure if it is still hacked and displaying the Chinese flag).
According to Ramos Horta, who is known for being very blunt in his assessment of most things, has said that the killings were not an accident nor did they occur in a cross-fire situation. To the contrary, according to Ramos Horta, the five journalist were tortured and then killed.
It is worth noting that Australia was the only country to recognize Indonesia's sovereignty over Timor Leste. It is also worth noting that the governments of Australia and the United States of America were complicit in the invasion as both gave the green light to Soeharto and his bunch of not so merry marauders to go about their invasion business.
Many are looking to see whether the film will put a strain on bilateral relations, it won't but it probably should! Now, whether or not it should is a different question altogether. Yet, if the most recent statements coming from the Indonesian Department of Foreign Affairs is anything to go by, then it is unlikely that there will be any significant impact on the relationship.
Teuku Faizasyah, is quoted as saying that to all intents and purposes this issue has been settled and the accepted explanation of the deaths are that the five journalists were killed in the cross-fire between Indonesian soldiers and Fretilin rebels. Simply, "they were in the wrong place at the wrong time." It is hardly surprising that the Indonesian government is dismissing the film as fiction and the vivid imagination of film makers.
What will be really interesting is whether or not the film gets past Indonesian censors and is shown in Indonesian theatres across the breadth of the archipelago. This is interesting because Faizasyah is also reported to have said that the Indonesian government is not into banning films as this would kill the film sector. This is certainly a different position from that which was adopted in the past.
My personal opinion is that they were murdered and that those responsible, the majority of whom are still alive, must be held accountable for their actions. On the bilateral relationship front between Indonesia and Australia, the relationship is likely to come under pressure if the Australian government was to get some testicular fortitude in the aftermath of the screening of the film and pursue the NSW Coroner's findings about who was responsible and what action should be taken (I have written about this here).
The reason I don't think that this film will unduly strain bilateral relations is that I do not believe that my government has the testicular fortitude, at this point in time, to pursue this. This makes me sad, if for no other reason that it proves the saying, "that the first casualty of war is truth".
I have not seen the film yet. I cannot get down to Melbourne for the festival. However, as soon as I get the chance to see it in Sydney, I will. I will then write a review of it and post it on the blog.
For now, I attach the Official Trailer (available on YouTube) for your viewing (dis)pleasure.
Now that Kevin Rudd has graduated from Opposition Spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, to leader of the Opposition, and now to Prime Minister is the Prime Minister going to follow through to its logical conclusion his previous statements relating to the Balibo Five.
The Prime Minister is on the record making statements with respect to the findings of the NSW Deputy Coroner, Dorelle Pinch, late in 2007. The Deputy State Coroner had found that the Balibo Five had been intentionally murdered and not killed in the cross-fire as claimed by Indonesian officials. Pinch then went on to forward the file to the Attorney General with a recommendation that at least two individuals, Christoforus Da Silva and Captain Yunus Yosfiah, be indicted and prosecuted for the commission of war crimes.
Yosfiah was a Captain at the time, but he went on to make the rank of Major General and became the Minister of Communication in the Habibe Government. He stands accused of being the man responsible for issuing the kill orders and he was the ranking officer on the scene at the time.
So, what did the now PM say when he was not PM?
"This is a very disturbing conclusion by the Coroner concerning the fate of the Balibo Five back in 1975." And "I believe this has to be taken through to its logical conclusion. I also believe those responsible should be held to account." Well, with the findings of the Deputy State Coroner in the hands of the Attorney General do you think that the PM has come out and made a public pronouncement that the Attorney General has been instructed to draw up the indictments, issue the arrest warrants, liaise with Interpol, and contact the Indonesian government about arresting the alleged perpetrators for prosecution. No way!
However, this may change if the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) makes a recommendation that an indictment must be issued. The ball will then be firmly in the court of the Attorney General and the PM to ante up and bite the bullet one way or the other.
The reason this never became huge news in Indonesia is that the Indonesian government does not believe that Australia has the courage of its convictions to pursue this and risk good bilateral relations with Indonesia. This is at a time where the rumor and innuendo is that the PM as a result of his past as a Diplomat in China and his Mandarin skills is promoting Australia's relationship with China in preference to any ongoing relationship with Indonesia. This was not entirely unexpected and in any event even the PM would have to acknowledge that the relationship with Indonesia is an important one.
The PM has allegedly been a staunch supporter of maintaining ties with the Indonesian military even when almost every one else was moving away from any kind of relationship. This has some negative implications as to whether the PM will have the testicular fortitude to follow through on his earlier statements that the Balibo Five case should be followed through to its logical conclusion, which to my mind is prosecution!
The Lombok Security Treaty of 2006 covers issues of law enforcement and the Extradition Treaty covers the matter of moving a person or persons for prosecution. The recent discussion on prisoner transfer are likely to bear fruit in the future and allow for the transfer of prisoners between Indonesia and Australia for the purposes of those prisoners serving out their respective sentences in their own land! The point here though is to highlight that any agreement imposes rights and obligations on both parties to the agreement. These rights and obligations must be lived up to if the agreements are to ever be truly effective.
The real test comes when an indictment is handed down and arrest warrants are issued. These issues will only intensify once an extradition request is lodged. Indonesia, as could Australia if the circumstances were reversed, refuse the extradition application. However, there would be a requirement that the Indonesian court system prosecute the matter. If the final and binding outcomes of the trials that resulted from the violence in Timor Leste in 1999 is any precursor to the outcome, then the trials will be a whitewash and no convictions are likely. This would be a very unsavoury end to a very unsavoury incident.
The reality is that two nation States, both democracies, must be able to overcome their differences on this matter and prosecute the alleged perpetrators. If the defendants are not guilty then let the process determine that. Equally, if they are then let the process determine that as well. If Australia does move down this path then it is likely to see considerable support come from other States seeking a resolution to this.
Indonesia should not see this as offering up some sacrificial lamb to the west, although this is how it will be portrayed, but rather as a means of showing to the world that Indonesia is serious about redressing the wrongs of the past, that it is a maturing democracy, and that it is prepared to deal with these matters as a member of the international community. This admittedly would be considerably easier if the States making the claims that Indonesia step up to the plate had spotless records themselves (but that is another post for another time)!
