Indonesia, Parliament & Porn: A Dilemma or A Storm In A Tea Cup?

There is nothing quite like vibrant democracy, and there is nothing quite like the era of technology that we live in right at this very moment. The reality is that technology makes everything we do potentially something that will find itself in the public domain. There is very little secrecy and even less privacy. The moments we thought were our own may in fact be shared with millions or perhaps billions of people in a very short space of time. The technology at our disposal also makes telling fibs and exaggerating justifications very difficult indeed.

Arifinto of the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) in Indonesia learnt this the hard way over the past weekend. Arifinto is one of the founders of the PKS. The PKS is an Islamic Party that has been instrumental in pushing an Islamic agenda and the Islamization of Indonesia's legal code. The party was the driving force in the drafting, passage and enactment of pornography legislation. This legislation is draconian in many ways and has been used most recently to put one of Indonesia's favourite singers, Nazril "Ariel" Irham behind bars for making a skin flick and allegedly distributing it online.

The story is a simple one. Arifinto was sitting in a plenary session of the House of Representatives on Friday, just before Friday prayers, when for some reason, known only to him, he decided to use his taxpayer provided Galaxy Tablet computer to watch a little bit of porn. To be blunt, if the man needs a little bit of video stimulation to get him through the day, then so be it. However, he was on the taxpayer funded clock and as such the taxpayers that pay his salary and provide the perks like tablet computers deserve better.

Arifinto's problem was not that he watched a skin flick on public time, but rather that he got caught. In Indonesia's form of open and accountable democracy, photographers are allowed into plenary sessions. In this case, Mohamad Irfan of Media Indonesia was busy snapping away from the gallery and caught Arifinto watching the porn in question. Unfortunately, for Arifinto he was not sure what Irfan had snapped and decided to make a statement that he had inadvertently opened a link in an email sent to him. However, Irfan's photographs were in fact a series of photos that show Arifinto opening the porn film from a file that was obviously saved to his computer.

Arifinto has now decided that the best course of action is to fall on his own sword and seek redemption by stating that he will return to the job of reciting the Koran and seeking forgiveness from Allah for straying from the path. Oh, and if he resigns, rather than waiting for the inevitable push, he maintains all the benefits that he has accrued as a member of parliament.

Herein lies the dilemma. Should a member of parliament who was doing what Arifinto was doing, and has been busted in the manner that he has, have any rights at all to collect taxpayer money in the form of a pension? The other dilemma for Indonesia and for the PKS is what punishment should Arifinto receive? This is particularly important considering it was the KS that were arguing for the severest available punishment to be applied to Ariel. Now,Ariel made a home-made sex tape, which in and of itself is not illegal in Indonesia, which was then stolen and uploaded to the internet without his permission. Therefore, a simple question is what punishment should now be applied to a PKS legislator who has obviously been involved in the distribution of pornography using taxpayer funded perks of office?

Arifinto must not be allowed to resign and slink off into the sunset and enjoy a long and fruitful retirement courtesy of the taxpayer or public purse.What is good for the goose is good for the gander, Arifinto must see the inside of a jail cell. After all, consistency in the severity of punishment needs to be maintained in order to maintain the faith of the general public that the law enforcement system is working, right?

The How Sad Files...

In some truly very sad news, Ruhut Sitompul can no longer afford to smoke cigars since becoming a member of the Democrat Party and entering parliament. All together now, ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, poor Ruhut!

It would seem, if The Jakarta Post is to be believed, that Ruhut is now scraping the bottom of the very deep cigar barrel he owns. As Ruhut describes it, he is almost running on cigar fumes as his only remaining cigars are gifts from former clients of his legal practice days.

However, I do not feel for Ruhut. He reckons that while working as a lawyer he was earning somewhere between USD 100,000 and USD 300,000 per month. Now, a man of his smarts must have surely socked some of that away in a shoe box that he now hides under his bed, right? I reckon the man can still afford to buy cigars. This latest "look at me" sound bite reeks of arrogance and a real lack of appreciation about how tough ordinary Indonesians are doing it on a daily basis.

Seriously, if Ruhut cannot afford to buy cigars then buy cigarettes. Ruhut, no one cares but you! If you are really poor, but still need to chomp on a cigar then buy local, buy the cigars that Indonesia produces. My guess is that your paltry parliamentarian salary will stretch far enough to buy locally produced cigars. I am pretty sure that Sampoerna makes a cigar. If not, then Gudang Garam makes one, right?

Indonesian parliamentarians might not be the best paid parliamentarians in the world but, in the big scheme of all things economic in Indonesia, they are far from being at the "poor" end of the Indonesian salary scale.

Ruhut, time to focus on the really important stuff, mate. Your lack of cigars is not that important to those Indonesians living on or below the poverty line, particularly those who choose to buy cigarettes in preference to feeding or educating their children.

Mr. Sitompul when you have something serious to say the feel free to pipe up and share your wisdom, but in the mean time...Ruhut, please deh!

Ancient Rome and a DPR Junket to Greece...

It is a good thing that I can touch type! Otherwise, I might not see the keyboard through the tears of laughter. This post is probably not an "only in Indonesia" one, but the supposed parliamentarians housed at the House of Representatives in Jakarta just do it with so much ease that it might as well be!

The latest in a long line of laughing stock moments is the Nudirman Munir of Golkar fame and a member of the DPR. It would seem that the DPR Ethics Council, of which Nudirman is Deputy Chairperson, has decided that it needs to take a comparative study tour to Greece in order to study the ethics of Ancient Rome. Nah, bugger me, but the last time I looked Rome ancient or otherwise would have found itself located in modern day Italy. In fact, the erstwhile members of the DPR ethics council would need to be undertaking a comparative study within a comparative study tour to get from Greece to Italy to do what it is that the trip, otherwise known as a junket, is supposed to let them learn.

But, the best part of the whole thing is that Nudirman rationalises the trip as needed in order to answer the very important questions of how parliamentarians can leave the chamber during sessions, whether the ethics council can dismiss parliamentarians, whether parliamentarians are permitted to smoke (presumably in the chamber during sessions), and views on the death penalty.

The last one is a hoot because this was justified as the members of the DPR Ethics Council needing to get first hand views on this as they have traditionally been fooled by do-gooder NGOs who pulled the wool over the ethics council's eyes. Yes, the tears are streaming down my cheeks now.

Yet, the icing on the cake despite all of those individually humorous moments above is that the "real" reason that the members need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money is that the information they hope to glean from going there in person cannot be found on the internet. My guess is that Nudirman needs to hire some better researchers or ask around. He might just find that he does not have to even leave Jakarta, let alone Indonesia, in order to find an expert that can fill him in on all that he doesn't currently know.

Now for the not so funny. During the period from 2004 through 2009, the DPR found time to take some 143 all-expenses paid comparative study tours from the public purse. Each of these 'tours' is supposed to generate a written report detailing the knowledge gained. The grand return from 143 tours is 3 reports. Yes, readers, that is three, 3, tiga reports. Of these three reports one of them is a one-page itinerary. Now, the data comes from some good friends of mine at PSHK (Center for Indonesian Law and Policy Studies or Pusat Studi Hukum dan Kebijakan). If you want to know more about these things then feel free to contact them.

If I was Nudirman, I would be hoping that I stayed high on the Golkar ticket because I almost certainly would not want to have to return to the real world and get a real job that did not involve the inexcusable and almost unaccountable waste of public funds on useless study trips.

But, while you're there Nudirman please don't forget the oleh-oleh! And, a photo standing in front of Big Ben as I am pretty sure that is not available on the internet.

Supreme Court, Gender, and Backlogs -- Indonesia

There was an interesting article in The Jakarta Globe that suggests that a recent appointment to the Indonesian Supreme Court can thank her gender for her appointment.

Sri Murwahyuni who previously sat on the Surabaya District Court has successfully negotiated the fit and proper testing procedures conducted by the House of [not so] Representatives to take her place as the 51st member of the Supreme Court bench. Yes, you read right, 51 members of the bench.

The other appointment was Sofyan Sitompul. Unfortunately, it would seem his gender was not of any assistance as he only just scraped through with 29 out of 57 votes of Commission III on legal affairs.

There are now six women on the 51 member Supreme Court bench. Not truly representative in a population sense, but certainly a move in the right direction.

However, I would be somewhat concerned that the perception is being allowed to develop that she was appointed based on her gender rather than her qualifications and skills, and more specifically what she brings to the Supreme Court as one of its newest members. This perception has developed and will continue to develop if legislators and other commentators do not re-orient their sound bites.

Let's face it,when the Head of the Commission suggests that gender played a role and was an advantage this immediately detracts from the appointee. This is plain and simple sad. This is even more so when the following sentence runs along the lines of "Oh, and she was also qualified too!" But, to add insult to injury, Benny K Harman, the Head of the Commission went one step further to reinforce a stereotype about women being more emotional than men and relying on unknown and unquantifiable other skills.

In this case, Harman said that "A female judge can use her intuition more than a man can and this is what the people want." Huh? What the people want, Benny, is consistency and equitable application of the law. The people want fairness. The people want to know that when they enter the legal system in pursuit of justice that they have every opportunity to find it.

Sad, Benny, sad!

But on a slightly different note. Ruhut Sitompul, no relation to the candidate, stated that there was no corruption in the process because he had never met Sofyan before the vote. I have to say, Ruhut, this hardly engenders any confidence in the process. So, if you had met him before then you might have been open to some good old-fashioned horse trading? But, this is about par for the course for Ruhut in pursuit of getting his head on TV. After all, it was not all that long ago he was seeking support for an idea to amend the constitution to allow SBY to seek a third presidential term for no other reason than all prospective candidates were lousy (in his view).

Sad, Ruhut, sad!

On a completely different note. There are now 51 members on the bench of the Supreme Court. There really should be no delay in seeking justice at the Supreme Court. There should not be any backlog of cases. A country of a similar population size, the USA, has a Supreme Court bench of just nine justices. They seem to manage their workload pretty well in comparison.

Ho hum...

KPK to PDI-P, Bugger Off!

Unfortunately, it would never happen! But, that is probably because I am not a member of the KPK. If it was me, then as soon as the PDI-P delegation turned up they would be turned away with a: "On ya bikes, and get the hell out of my office!" Closely followed with, "I am trying to do some serious work, you people down the DPR building in Senayan should consider trying it some day...work that is!"

Seriously, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) names some PDI-P legislators, former and current, as suspects in a bribery case, and the PDI-P thinks that as a party it has a right to interrogate the KPK and demand some answers (and presumably a copy of the current case brief).

It would seem that the PDI-P beef with the KPK is why the KPK made a public announcement that named the PDI-P legislators as suspects. The rationale being that this is not all above board and that the KPK is being pressured, politically, to rush to judgment. This rationale is premised loosely on prevailing laws and regulations, at least the PDI-P interpretation of them, namely: that the receivers of bribes are secondary level suspects and the main suspects have to be those giving the bribe.

The best part of the PSI-P argument for not naming the former and current PDI-P legislators as suspects is that state officials who have received bribes but pay that money back cannot be guilty of a crime. I am sure that their will be plenty of Indonesians who find this truly offensive to their sense of right and wrong, and to the idea of justice. The whole idea that corruption is only corruption if you get caught, and then if you are caught you can absolve the original crime by paying back any monies or assets you received. Simply, if you are a state official what have you got to lose. You take the bribe, if you get caught you pay it back. If you do not get caught, then you just live it up with your new found wealth.

Too sad for words. It is no wonder that Megawati and the PDI-P have fared so badly in recent elections and lost the popularity of the "little people" or wong cilik that the party once so dominated.

Another classic PDI-P quotable moment was provided by Trimedya Panjaitan. Panjaitan suggested that the KPK was being politicised and that the KPK had only named the PDI-P lawmakers because the PDI-P was a successful opposition party, and the KPK was being used to undermine the PDI-P. He then goes on to suggest that the visit was not intended to interfere with the investigation of KPK's affairs. Uh huh! Whatever he is smoking, I need some of that!

PDI-P really needs to rethink its game if it is to walk the walk as an opposition party instead of doing a poor job on trying to talk the talk, and make that enough to sway voters to their party.

Ho hum...

SBY and a Third Term as President?

Oh dear!

Ruhut Sitompul seems to want to return to his comedic acting roots by suggesting that the Constitution should be amended so that the current two-term limit on presidents can be extended to three terms or more.

The problem I have with this is not amending the Constitution. In a democracy the amending of the Constitution is possibly. There are strict rules in place for how this is done. If they are followed, and this is truly the will of the Indonesian people then so be it.

However, how quickly we forget. Indonesia is only a little more than ten years removed from what was a period of guided democracy under Soekarno, Indonesia's first president, and the ruthless, iron-fisted dictatorship of Soeharto. Both of these periods saw the slaughter of untold numbers of Indonesians. The very power to do this came from the fact that power was quickly consolidated and no term limits forced political change to occur no matter how minimal.

Look, the term limit system is not perfect, one only has to look at Russia and how Vladimir Putin has manipulated the political term limits system to ensure that he remains a powerful force, but that does not make it right.

So, how should we view Ruhut's latest jaunt into controversy? The cynic, or conspiracy theorist, in me says that this is a far more elaborate, and cunning, plan than people and media are giving it credit for. At the moment, most people seem to think that this is just "crazy old Ruhut trying to make a name for himself and get into the papers and on TV."

To the contrary, this could just as easily be the Democrat Party testing the waters for a move to introduce a constitutional amendment to parliament in a move to change term limit laws. By getting Ruhut to put the suggestion out there in the public sphere allows Yudhoyono and the Democrat Party to put at arm's length the statements of Ruhut.

This might seem surprising to some, but it is easier enough to do as Ruhut has always been viewed as the one that might let his mouth get into gear before his brain does. This in, and of itself, is surprising because Ruhut is obviously not a stupid man, this idea aside, so it seems strange to write this off as the ramblings of a crazy old politician with nothing better to do.

Hence, the idea that this may in fact be the Democrat Party, on Yudhoyono's instructions, testing the waters. After all, power tends to corrupt, if you search the annals of Indonesian political media coverage you will uncover plenty of statements to the effect that Yudhoyono only wanted to serve the people of Indonesia and he only wanted to do that for one term. He is now on his second term.

There is no legal harm in SBY doing a constitutionally permitted second term. There is plenty of social harm though, in popularly electing to a second term, a president who talks the talk but cannot walk the walk on corruption, among other problems.

Hopefully, the Indonesian people will react negatively to the idea of SBY doing a third term as president and this little sideshow can be put to bed forever.

Positive Economic News -- Indonesia...

The economic outlook and news associated with Indonesia for most of this year has been positive. In many respects, this is not surprising. How much one attributes this to SBY personally or good policy remains a subject of debate among some. There is little doubt that the figures are looking up compared to a few years ago. For the New York Times view on Indonesia and the future economic outlook, and where this graphic was lifted from, go here. It makes for interesting reading.

According to the NYT, Indonesia is Asia's new "Golden Child". This is high praise indeed. Yet, it might be putting the horse before the cart in the sense of being a little premature. Remembering that many thought the fundamentals of the Indonesian economy were pretty solid back in 1997 and 1998. History tells us that these fundamentals were not so solid after all. 

There is also the issue of corruption. SBY came to the presidency with an overwhelming mandate to fight corruption and rid Indonesia of this scourge. He has largely been unsuccessful. So, despite concerns about corruption and confusing local legislation, investors are returning in force, sort of. This is more an indication of businesses / investors recognising the huge upside potential of a market of some 250 million consumers, particularly where the vast majority of these are under 30s and a little more carefree on their consumptive ways.

It is always interesting, at least it was when I lived in Indonesia, to listen to people talking about financial crises, global meltdowns, and other tidbits of economic woe and mayhem. This was because walking the malls of the greater Jakarta metropolitan area, one would be forgiven if they could not fathom where the crisis was. Quite simply, people were still out and about, still shopping, still drinking coffee, still going to movies, pretty much living as they always had. The only concession might have been there were less people in these places, but they were not empty. 

It would also be remiss of me not to note that as soon as you walked out of the luxury of the malls you could see first hand what sort of destruction the financial crises had wreaked on the lower middle classes and the poor.

Nevertheless, the point is that it is not all that surprising that Indonesia has "rebounded" as strongly as it has.

Let's hope that the fundamentals are strong, the government is able to make some serious inroads into the battle against corruption, and the parliament can actually pull the collective fingers out and pass some legislation that will support the fight against corruption and convince investors that the risks they take are not with the applicable legislation.

My apologies to any readers who have more economic sense than me for any shortcomings in my cursory analysis!

Pong Harjatmo -- Actor and Graffiti Artist...

Most people would expect that their elected members of parliament would live by a creed that demands honesty resoluteness, and fairness. So, having it spray painted on the roof of the Indonesian parliament does not seem all that outrageous in the big scheme of democracy.

Then again, it is Indonesia and most would argue, at least anecdotally, that the people's house in Indonesia, the parliament, is not a bastion of honesty, resoluteness, or even fairness. It is a place, usually uninhabited during plenary sessions, that spends a lot of money, the people's money, and has next to nothing to show for it. For example, legislation. Members can you count the number of pieces of legislation you have passed this term to date? Oh yes, none, zero, zip, bugger all.

So, when Pong Harjatmo decided he was going to climb up onto the roof of the DPR and spray paint his demands on the green roof, it was sure to attract a little attention. It was good to see that the old fella was not disappointed. Pong was a bit of a legend of film back in the 1970s and 1980s, he is now a legend again but for slightly different reasons.

Pong was arrested for his artwork and questioned. He was, however, released without charge. He was given a slap on the wrist and told not to be out and about spray painting his protests on government buildings. Not to be deterred, Pong has said he will be making his protests wherever he feels is appropriate. If I may be so forward, the Police Headquarters could use some new paint!

DPR Showing Porn...

It would seem that someone at the DPR has a really bizarre sense of humor or there are those that are not to keen on Tifatul Sembiring's (aka TitS), the Minister of Communication and Information, plan to ban all porn sites before Ramadan. I found this really interesting image highlighting how censorship might work in Indonesia, but rather than post it, I will just link to it here.

In what some news agencies are reporting as a major embarrassment, the DPR computer-based information screens had a porn moment earlier in the day and displayed some pretty graphic pornographic images and porn ads for young teen sites. It is being reported that the screens in the offices of the DPR leadership were also 'infected'. Detik is reporting that the 14-inch touch screens were also guilty of being conduits of graphic porn. The idea of porn on a touch screen allows for the mind to boggle.

I remember as a kid having one of those scratch and smell t-shirts; you know the ones, a picture of a strawberry that you rub and then you get the smell of strawberries happening...but I guess you know where I am going with that one so no need to go there now.

The display has sparked an investigation to see how such pictures could find their way onto the computers used at the DPR, and why it was so difficult to shut them down.

If nothing else, this little trip into the perversely funny highlights just how difficult it is going to be for TitS to shut the pornographers down.

Ho hum...

You Get What You Vote For...

The beauty of a democracy is you get what you vote for.

And, if you get taken in by the charm offensive of candidates about how, once they are elected, they are going to serve your interests because you are the constituents and they serve only at your pleasure, blah, blah, blah (how cynical am I tonight?), then you could end up with this view on a regular number of plenary session days in the Indonesian Parliament.

If you want to read about the lazy Indonesian legislators, and their excuses for excessive absenteeism, then head over to The Jakarta Globe. The best excuses to date have been that parliamentarians work too hard and that they have permission letters from their parties to be absent. It sort of reminds me of the permission notes I write for my students when they want to leave class to go to the toilet.

But, if you just want to have a chuckle about the empty "people's house" then the picture is for you!

Time For SBY To Step Up To The Plate...

The Fact Finding Team appointed by the President of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono or SBY, has held a press conference to relay their findings and what they intend to put in writing to the president. It is worth noting that the fact finding team, or the Team of Eight as it is known, have no real powers to stop the investigations by the police or the Office of the Attorney General (AGO).

Nevertheless, considering that SBY went to the trouble of appointing the team means that if he does not follow through on what the team finds, then he will look like he is dragging his feet and this can only be a negative in the long-term for the president and his legacy.

The fact finding team has reported that the police and the AGO do not have a case against Chandra and Bibit. The evidence that they offered up to the team as proof of the case has been deemed inadequate. It has been deemed to be insufficient to sustain the indictment and it has been deemed to not be sufficient to get a conviction. This is a pretty big slap in the face for both the police and the AGO.

It is worth noting that this is also a pretty big slap in the face for the president as well. He steadfastly refused to become involved and his reluctance to do so has shown him to be weak on ant-corruption measures and willing to do whatever it takes to avoid making the hard decisions and upsetting the apple cart. The failures in this case will continue to haunt SBY for some time. They might also be instrumental in undermining any legacy that he thought he might be leaving with respect to being a reformer and corruption fighter.

What the interim report does put into play now is how should those who remain be dealt with. This is particularly so for the lead actor in this charade, Anggodo. Anggodo by his own admission has seemingly said he was trying to bribe members of the KPK and had disbursed money for that purpose. If there is no evidence, and the fact finding team says that there is not, then Anggodo must be charged with obstruction of justice type violations and making an attempt to bribe members of the KPK.

Furthermore, the Chief of Police and the Attorney General must also be investigated to determine what they knew and when. It seems that both were either involved in the construction of the case against Chandra and Bibit or were aware early that it was a fabrication. Both men have fronted the relevant Commission at the DPR and claimed that there is evidence of the extortion and bribes being completed, In essence, they have suggested that both the police and the AGO intend to pursue the matter to its conclusion.

The only way that either can avoid the pink slip treatment is to prove that to all intents and purposes they were "just doing their jobs". Somehow this seems unlikely.

It appears that round three, four, and five have gone to the KPK as well. The police and the AGO are taking a beating in not only the courts of law but the court of public opinion as well.

Time to give this one up.

Smells Like Bullshit...

Here is a little gem from the Indonesian Attorney General. This was offered to Commission III at the Indonesian House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat / DPR), as reported by The Jakarta Post:

“There is no evidence of bribery. But there is other proof to lead us to conclude the violation took place, although we have no adequate evidence of the acceptance of bribes.”

This is clearly double-speak nonsense. Two parts of the quote state that there is not only no evidence but what they have is inadequate. This is then moderated by there is proof that the violation, in this case bribery and extortion, took place.

Now, if this is what the Attorney General intends to proceed to trial on, then he really must start packing his bags and cleaning out his office.

The president has no choice but to intervene. The AG must be dismissed and replaced by someone who has a better understanding of what the law requires for an indictment to be made and a trial to be undertaken. Simply, the "proof" that the AG is referring to is clearly the recanted testimony of a number of suspects and witnesses. The fact that the proof has been recanted suggests that the prospects for success at trial would be somewhere between nothing and a snowflake's chance in hell.

It is way past time for the police and the AGO to give this one up.

No apologies for the title of this post or the picture.

A Brief Overview of the New Law on Agricultural Land and Sustainable Crops...

This first appeared on http://en.hukumonline.com. This is a slightly modified version of that article.

The House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat / DPR) has passed the Bill on the Protection of Agricultural Lands for Sustainable Crops. The bill was enacted under the mandate of Law No. 26 of 2007 on Spatial Planning which requires that a law be enacted to protect agricultural lands for sustainable crops. The bill also recognizes the right to agricultural land for sustainable crops is a human right that must be guaranteed. The bill also recognizes that there is a need to ensure the supply of land for sustainable crops as a means of ensuring crop independence.

The premise of the bill is that agricultural land for sustainable crops is an integral part of the lives and prosperity of the nation. The rapid development of Indonesia that encroaches upon land that was previously farmed means that the ability to produce sustainable crops diminishes each time agricultural land is converted into residential or industrial zones. The government has determined that the best way to protect this agricultural land from future residential or industrial development is to designate it as agricultural land and then put in place provisions to protect it.

Therefore, the bill sets out that there are certain parcels of land that are protected for use for sustainable crops. However, the government has also realized that with an ever-expanding population, the mere protection of land for agriculture is not sufficient by itself. As such, the bill also sets out provisions to allow for enhancing the productive capabilities of that land. The bill achieves this by regulating all matters relating to planning, determining, developing, utilizing, managing, controlling, and supervising the lands.

It is worth noting that the provisions that protect agricultural lands designated for sustainable crops from transformation is not absolute. Where there is a public interest need to transform then land, then this may be authorized. The elucidation to Article 44(2) defines what sort of projects would constitute the public interest. Some of these projects include, among others, roads, irrigation channels, airports, train stations and rail networks, and electricity generation sites.

When the government acquires designated agricultural land in the public interest, compensation is to be paid. This compensation can be financial or it may be in the form of a land swap.

There are two types of sanctions set out in the bill: administrative and criminal. The administrative sanctions are standard warning letters and fines, among others. The criminal sanctions provide for terms of imprisonment up to a maximum of 7 years, and criminal fines of up to IDR 7 billion.

All implementing regulations mandated by the provisions in this bill are to be implemented within 24 months of the bill’s enactment.

Another issue that the bill sort of alludes to but does not really address is food sustainability with respect to supply. The idea that protecting agricultural land for sustainable crops is an honorable one. However, a more pressing concern over time is going to be feeding the people. Indonesia is heading towards a scenario where there are going to be more people to feed and an inability to feed them. Simply, there is not enough land to protect as agricultural land without reducing more of Indonesia's natural forests to farm land in order to be food self-sufficient.

Climate change, irrespective of whether it is attributed to human-made global warming or a natural phenomenon, is also going to be a major consideration going forward.

The bill is interesting for what it tries to protect, but really for the bill to have meaning it needs to be part of a much greater regulatory initiative directed to greater and longer-lasting food self-sufficiency.

Is A PERPU A Law?

There is current debate in the cyberworld over at Politikana as to the nature of a PERPU. A PERPU is Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang. This is translated as Government Regulation In Lieu of Law which is literally what it says. However, when I translate it I always use the term "Interim Law". The simple rationale here is that the regulation is put into place to act as a law and behaves as a law for a defined period of time.

This debate has come about as the President of the Republic of Indonesia, one Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, has decided that the best way to deal with the current conflict between the police and the Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi / KPK) is to issue a PERPU to replace the KPK commissioners that have become non-active as a result of being declared suspects in an investigation of alleged criminal activity (this will be the subject of another post).

Getting to the legal nitty gritty. The Law on Legislation Drafting (Law No. 10 of 2004 on Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-undangan) in Article 7 lists the hierarchy of laws and regulations in Indonesia. This places a PERPU under the 1945 Constitution but on the levle of a law (undang-undang). This would seem to resolve any dispute about where the PERPU fits and the intent, or understanding of the Parliament, as to the function of a PERPU.

Nevertheless, a PERPU has really limited use. A PERPU can only be issued in a moment of crisis or emergency. Now, this is where it all becomes a little subjective and discretionary. It depends on who is making the decision as to whether something is an emergency or not. In any event, Article 25 of Law No. 10 of 2004 requires that a PERPU be submitted (normally in the form of a Bill) to the next sitting of parliament. At this point the DPR gets the opportunity to pass the Bill (former PERPU) into law or reject it. If the DPR rejects the bill or decides to bounce it around for a while then the PERPU by default expires and there is a return to the previous incarnation of the law.

It is debatable as to whether the current situation with the KPK is an emergency for the purposes of a PERPU. There are obviously those for and against the proposition. I am against it. I do not believe that the current situation warrants a PERPU in order to resolve the conflict. Appointing commissioners to the KPK through a PERPU runs counter to the idea of independence that the KPK is supposed to enjoy from political interference. It is clear that the KPK commissioners are some of the most vetted individuals to date in Indonesia. To then make them a presidential appointment begs the question, "who will prosper in a scenario of political / presidential appointments to a corruption eradication body?" The answer to that question might tell one why a PERPU is being touted as the best possible option.

A PERPU is by default a law, but a law of restricted use and of limited value.

At least in my humble opinion. So, as "Big" John McCarthy used to say in UFC, "Let's get it on!"

The New Law On Film In Indonesia -- Some Preliminary Thoughts...

The bill is not short on controversy and not all stakeholders are happy about the provisions that have been codified into the new law. The bill, as most Indonesian laws do, make grand and bold statements as to the context in which the bill was drafted and debated. In this case, the bill suggests that the reformasi that Indonesia has undergone since 1998 and the fall of the New Order Regime of the former president Soeharto, included not only a political reformation but a cultural one too. As part of this cultural reformation the manner in which film is viewed has changed. Consequently, the previous regulatory framework for film, Law No. 8 of 1992, is no longer fit for purpose and needed to be repealed and replaced with a piece of legislation that reflects the current state of the Indonesian film industry in 2009.

The government views the new law as a step in the right direction with respect to the promotion and development of the thriving Indonesian film industry. However, in contrast, some within the thriving Indonesian film industry are openly questioning whether the new law is going to be conducive to the freedom of expression they have enjoyed in recent years to make the films they have wanted to make or whether the new provisions are going to stifle their creative opportunities with respect to making films that satisfy their creative energy. And, any stifling of the creative aspects of film-making would seemingly fly in the face of a recent Presidential Instruction on the Creative Economy.

The debate, although seemingly settled, with the passage of the bill through the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat / DPR) on 8 September 2009 may not be the end of the matter as there have been concerns raised with regards to whether or not quorum was reached in the DPR when the bill was passed. However, a more pertinent debate is whether the provisions infringe on the freedom of expression that Indonesians believed they enjoy as part of the series of Constitutional amendments made at the beginning of the reformation period or not.

At the heart of this debate is whether a modern and developing democracy such as Indonesia needs a censorship board or agency to vet film content or whether a film classification board would be sufficient for the purpose of rating films based on their content. Furthermore, the new law stipulates that film scripts must be registered and listed with the minister at least three months prior to any filming being undertaken. Ostensibly, this is to ensure that no two films are being made with the same title or on the same content / issues. Nevertheless, this provision would seemingly provide the power to the minister to vet and then veto any film which the minister deemed to be inappropriate.

The provisions of the new law require that all films conform to explicit societal mores and norms, and these are set out with respect to what is prohibited in Article 6. Simple, scenes that show violence, gambling, the misuse and abuse of drugs and other addictive substances, pornography, provocation between ethnic groups or races, questions religion or religious practices, encourages criminal activity or lowers the honor of the community are all prohibited. In essence, a foreign film like Ocean’s Eleven, which deals with gambling, and therefore would seemingly have to fall foul of the censors and be prohibited from screening. Similarly, local Indonesian films such as the martial arts film, Merantau, might also fall foul of Indonesia’s new censorship board as a consequence of the scenes that portray violence, drugs, and perhaps even scenes devoted to issues of human trafficking.

The new law sets out four classifications; all ages, 13+ years of age, 17+ years of age, and 21+ years of age. Films for the 21+ classification can only be screened between the hours of 23.00 and 03.00 and these films cannot be screened in a public space.

Foreign film makers wanting to use an Indonesian location must obtain the permission of the minister prior to shooting being commenced. The Elucidations to this provision only state that it is ‘self-explanatory’. Presumably, the permit procedure would require that the foreign film maker submit a script and all other relevant information prior to the minister considering a permit application.

The government’s argument for the new law supporting the development and expansion of the Indonesian film industry relies on the rather short Article, Article 32, which stipulates that at least 60% of all the hours that films are shown during any six-month period must be Indonesian films. The question many film makers have is whether they can make a sufficient number of films in light of all the prohibitions they are under with regards to content.

Film festivals, or more broadly film appreciation activities, are specifically regulated under the new law. These activities can be undertaken by private individuals, groups or organizations, the central government, or regional governments. Nevertheless, specific provisions on how the relevant articles are to be implemented will become clearer once the associated Ministerial Regulations are issued.

The devolution of authorities under the provisions provides that the regional governments can facilitate film production within their respective regional areas. This would include facilitating Indonesian films to satisfy the 60% content provisions noted previously. Regional governments would also be required to facilitate the production of documentary films on their respective cultural uniqueness and other regionally specific issues.

The central government has responsibility with respect to facilitating film-making through the provision of tax and other kinds of duty and excise exemptions and reductions.

The funding of films is set out as a joint responsibility that would permit the central and regional governments to contribute. However, it is expected that any funds that are to be provided by government would be best administered through the creation of a film corporation which is tasked specifically with managing these funds. Unfortunately, the new law and the elucidations do not provide any additional input on this issue beyond funding being a joint responsibility.

The new law sets out both administrative and criminal sanctions. The administrative sanctions are the standard written warnings, fines, temporary suspension of activities, and the revocation of licenses and permits. The criminal sanctions provide for terms of imprisonment of between 6 months and 2 years, and fines of between IDR 10 billion and IDR 100 billion.

Finally, the current censorship board is to remain in place until such time as the new censorship board is installed. The new censorship board must be installed no later than 18 months from the date of enactment of the new law.

The new law is not without some controversy. However, the entry into law appears a mere formality with the president expected to sign the bill.

The Halal Products Bill -- Islamization by Stealth?

Whenever Indonesia debates a new law or an amendment bill that infringes upon civil rights or has been drafted to address a specific religious requirement, a parallel debate arises about whether or not the bill is an attempt at Islamization of Indonesia. Sometimes, the concerns raised are legitimate and sometimes they are not.

The morality based bills such as the proposed amendments to the Criminal Code which would ostensibly ban public displays of affection between men and women, including married couples, is one such example. Another example, was the passage of the Anti-Pornography bill, as the bill to all intents and purposes seemingly restricts the freedom of expression particularly in the arts. A further example is another bill currently before the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat / DPR) on film. This bill certainly ups the ante with respect to censorship and what is permitted to be made, let alone what might negotiate any censorship board.

However, it is the Bill on Halal Products that seems to have drawn the ire of many as a direct and not so stealthy attempt to impose Sharia law on all of Indonesia's citizens and not just the majority of the community that identifies as Muslim. Halal in a very general sense means that the product is one that is permitted for the purposes of consumption by Muslims.

This bill in essence sets out what must be done in order for a product to be classified as halal, and then once an application is made for certification as halal, and then how that product is to be packaged and labeled. The bill does not prevent the production, distribution, and sale of non-halal (or haram / prohibited) products. Once again, the bill sets out how a product comes to be classified and labeled as halal. Presumably any company seeking to have a leg of ham classified as halal is going to fail in their application. However, this does not mean that the leg of ham cannot be sold.

In many ways the halal symbol or label is no different from the "healthy heart" symbol that you can find on products that have successfully passed the certification process stipulated for the symbol to be applied. This is also similar for products that now carry symbols that say they are certified suitable for diabetics or people with high blood pressure or products that are certified dolphin safe.

The difference is that in most cases the symbols attached to products are certified by independent bodies and are not regulated in law beyond a very basic minimum. For example, in Australia there are laws that require that the claims of a product be substantiated. This would mean that if a producer offered a cure for cancer, then that claim would need to be substantiated. If it could not be substantiated then this would be a breach of the prevailing laws and regulations.

So, in that sense the bill is hardly Islamization by stealth. The adding of a halal seal to products will provide a guarantee to discerning Muslims that the product they are about to purchase meets some exacting standards with respect to a products halal-ness or lack thereof. Nevertheless, this might depend on how independent the certification process is and how independent those involved in the certification agency are.

Currently, it would seem that the Indonesian Ulama Council (Majelis Ulema Indonesia / MUI) will play a primary role as the peak Muslim body in Indonesia. Then again, how independent can the body be when its role is specifically to certify what is and what is not halal for a specific religion?

A far greater threat would be a local ordinance, such as the one recently pushed through in Bogor as it attempts to become a halal city, which prohibits the slaughtering of pigs within city limits. This would seemingly increase costs as any pork products would have to be brought in from other places and not sourced locally. An argument might conceivably be made that this ordinance is a breach of a constitutionally guaranteed right to not be subject to discrimination. Whether anyone picks up the baton on this one remains to be seen.

Going forward, it seems likely that this debate is going to arise ever more frequently.

Transmigration in Indonesia -- Amended Regulatory Framework...

This is something that was written for en.hukumonline.com. The original can be found here.

The era of “reformasi” was the spur for many changes in Indonesia, and this includes the drive to amend the 1945 Constitution of the Republic. There have been four amendments to date. These amendments were enacted in the period between 1999 and 2002. Furthermore, the amendments have since required that other legislation (laws and regulations) also be amended to ensure that those pieces of legislation comply with the amended Constitution.

The previous law on Transmigration Law No. 15 of 1997, has been amended in order to comply with the Constitution as it now stands, particularly with respect to matters of regional autonomy.

The Amendment Bill on Law No. 15 of 1997 was passed by the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat / DPR) and is currently awaiting the signature of the president before it can be promulgated as law. The amendments focus almost exclusively on the decentralization of certain transmigration related authorities from the Central Government to the relevant Regional Governments. The amendments also endeavor to create a more conducive transmigration sector; conducive to investment.

Articles 7 – 9, 13 – 15, 25, 26, 29, 30, 32, 33, and 35 have been amended, as has the Title of Chapter VII. Additionally, Chapter IX and Article 34 have been repealed. Finally, three Chapters have been inserted and replace Chapter XI, specifically: Chapters XA, XB, and XC.

One of the most notable changes is that the authority to: determine, establish, and develop areas for transmigration has devolved to the relevant regional governments. This is notable for two reasons; this places greater administrative control on the regional governments themselves to be pro-active in providing support for the transmigration program and accountability.

In effect, the amendments would provide the opportunity to enterprising regional governments to either go it alone or enter into private / public partnerships to develop and exploit their regional potential by enhancing opportunities for transmigration. Whether this eventuates remains to be seen. Nevertheless, the potential for such a development is clearly available under the provisions of the amended law.

The new law provides for sanctions to be imposed on anyone who breaches the prevailing provisions. This is irrespective of whether the breach is conducted by a government official, a business entity, a transmigrant, or some other individual or group. Generally, the sanctions provide for:

• Oral / written warnings;
• Cancellation of licenses (for business entities), transmigrant status (for transmigrants), and / or the Minister of Labor and Transmigration (for groups of people); and
• Criminal sanctions. Not all of the amendments are significant in terms of size.

For example, the provisions of Chapter VIII have been amended to merely change one word; “guidance” (pembinaan) to “development” (pengembangan). Nevertheless, there is seemingly a significant difference in terms of what is required between providing guidance and facilitating development. Yet, the amendment is just one word.

The bill comes into immediate force once it is promulgated. Enactment requires the signature of the President. If the President fails to sign the bill into law then the bill will self-enact after 30 days pursuant to the 1945 Constitution.

SBY and the Photos -- Are They or Aren't They...

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, or SBY as he is affectionately known, seems to have erred in his speech in the immediate aftermath of the bombings of the JW Marriott and Ritz-Carlton hotels last Friday. The president used the opportunity to link the bombings to the recent presidential elections and then to link his political rivals to the bombings and other yet to occur violence at the Headquarters of the General Election Commission (Komisi Pemilihan Umum / KPU).

It is now being argued whether the speech is to become an ongoing political problem for the incumbent president as he heads into a likely second term (the official election results have not yet been released) or is it nothing more than a storm in a tea cup that will dissipate as quickly as it formed.

It has also recently come to light that the photos that the president used in order to highlight that the terrorists were in fact after him are probably from 2004. So, it seems highly unlikely that the link between the alleged plot targeting the president, the bombings, and the photos can be sustained. Ruhut Sitompul of the Partai Demokrat is unequivocal in stating that the photos were confiscated in May 2009 at a terrorist training facility in East Kalimantan. The president also is adopting this line.

Yet, there are plenty of people coming forward suggesting that these are the same photos that were shown to the House of Representatives (DPR) in 2004 by the National Intelligence Agency (Badan Intelijen Negara / BIN). Permadi and Andreas Pereira of PDI-P have said that they saw these pictures in 2004. Sidney Jones of the International Crisis Group also believes that the photos originated in 2004 and were taken at a facility in West Seram in Maluku.

If it is true that these photos are from 2004 then there are two distinct possibilities; the president has been misled by his closest security advisers or SBY was being a little disingenuous by using these photos to link the attacks to himself and the recent elections.

However, the president is not conceding that he erred in his judgment in making the statements that he made. To the contrary, SBY has gone on the offensive to state that his comments have been misinterpreted as the speech did not link the hotel bombings to the elections and presumably he did not all but name Prabowo as being involved.

I must add here that I am not a fan of Prabowo. The evidence put forward to date that he was involved in the disappearance and presumed murder of activists in 1998 is compelling and deserves to be heard in a court of law. The idea that the let bygones be bygones, and that this is all ancient history and Indonesia is ready to move on, neglects to understand the loss suffered by the family and friends of those who were disappeared. My argument has always been that the timing of SBY in calling out Prabowo, and suggesting that Prabowo's time was near in terms of him being held accountable for his past sins, in this particular speech and at this particular moment was poor. I am all for the heat being turned up on Prabowo.

The president claims that the photos are from 2009 and the intelligence is real, and not some rumour, gossip, or beat-up for the press as being perpetuated by those not in the know.

The debate as it develops is interesting as there are two distinct camps evolving; those that think the president erred in the manner in which he went about this business and those who do not give the proverbial, rat's arse, and who cannot see what the fuss is about. In the former camp is Professor Effendy Ghazali. Ghazali is adamant that SBY has made a "significant mistake". The reality is a little more simple than that, the president might have erred in his judgment on this one but it is far from likely that this error is going to be fatal to his next term in office.

If the photos are definitively proven to be from 2004 and not from May 2009 then this story might get a new set of legs.

Watch this space.

Sri Mulyani Indrawti -- Governor of the Indonesian Central Bank?

Politics in Indonesia is a strange animal and even stranger are the motivations of those that play. The latest rumor or perhaps a little more than rumor now that the incumbent president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono or SBY to his friends, has said that he is considering it, is the selection of Sri Mulyani Indrawati (photo) as the prospective Governor of Bank Indonesia (Indonesia's Central Bank).

Sri Mulyani is one of SBY's best performing Ministers, if not his best performing Minister. She holds the Finance Portfolio and since the former Coordinating Minister of Economic Affairs, Boediono, was appointed to Bank Indonesia, she has held that portfolio as well.

She is a world class reformer and has made significant inroads into reforming the bureaucracy. She is generally considered to have been successful in her role and been a driving force in cleaning up her department.

Why is it that her appointment to Bank Indonesia is problematic when Bank Indonesia is also an institution that could benefit from her reforming ways? Well, the move reeks of marginalizing the competition and a real shaker and mover on the agenda of reform. A move to Bank Indonesia takes Sri Mulyani out of the majority of the policy areas that she has been so intimate and successful in to date. Almost certainly leading to a waning of her influence in real and broad reforms.

The move is a backward step for those interested in the bureaucratic reform of government. This is not to say that there are not worthy candidates to replace her, there are. This is a backward step because whoever replaces her would have to work twice as hard to develop the gravitas she has acquired during her time in the position. If SBY, and Boediono, are serious then the most sensible move would be, assuming SBY and Boediono win the presidency and vice-presidency, is to make Sri Mulyani the Coordinating Minister of Economic Affairs in the next SBY Government.

There is little doubt that Sri Mulyani would be appointed to the position of Governor of Bank Indonesia if she were proposed as a candidate. Her confirmation through the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR) would not likely encounter much resistance, if any.

Swine Flu In Indonesia...

It seems that Indonesia has recorded its first cases of swine flu or the H1N1. Both cases have been detected in Bali and it seems that the infected individuals are tourists. At least one of them resides in Australia. This has given Indonesia cause for concern that Australians are bringing swine flu to Indonesia through Bali.

This might be one for the conspiracy theorists and those on the House of Representatives Commission I on Defense, Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, Communications and Information, who might be inclined to do a little sabre rattling about how foreign interests are trying to undermine Indonesia.

As you can see, the US President is not taking any chances.