RIM Blocks Porn on BlackBerry Smartphones in Indonesia...

All hail to the Anti-Pornography King, TitS!

TitS (aka Tifatul Sembiring) has seemingly won the battle with RIM. RIM have not only agreed to block pornography from their BlackBerry Smartphones, but they have gone even further by simply adopting the filtering system developed by the Nawala Project.

This filtering system blocks out all content that is considered to be not only pornographic, but that content that is considered to be related to gambling, phishing / malware, and SARA (this is a term that relates to anything involving religion, ethnicity, race, or inter-group relations). The filter is very broad, which means that many Indonesians will not be able to access sites through their BlackBerry devices that are harmless.

It must be pointed out that the Nawala project is an Indonesia created open-source filtering service that has been in operation since 2009. It is the filtering service of choice for all of Indonesia's telecommunications providers, and it is the one that is being touted by the Ministry of Communication and Information.

The use of the Nawala Project filtering system by RIM is a cost-effective way of meeting the demands for a porn filter from the Minister for [Mis]Communication and [Mis]Information. It is cost effective because it is open-source and it is free. Although, it would seem that Irwin Day, Deputy Head of Public Relations at the Nawala Project, is contemplating that RIM might make some financial contribution to the ongoing development of the technology.

What's next? Well, the porn filter issue was really only a pre-cursor to a much larger battle in TitS' war against RIM. The Minister wants a server, or at least an aggregator, to be built in Indonesia. The rationale is a simple one; Indonesia is the biggest user of RIM BlackBerry devices in Southeast Asia and has earned the right to have the server / aggregator built in Indonesia. For Indonesian subscribers, the belief is that a server here will reduce BlackBerry tariffs. In contrast, the Minister wants the RIM server here because he believes that it will make it easier for his Ministry to track corruption and terrorism suspects and their communications.

If RIM stands true to form then it would be reasonable to expect them to fold on that demand as well. I wonder how long it will be before RIM and its Managing Director for this part of the world, Gregory Wade, are announcing their plans to build a server in Jakarta?

If TitS is giving all his praise to Allah for allowing him a victory in the filter battles, then one can only imagine how much beside himself he will be when RIM announces that it is building a server in Indonesia. It might just be enough to send him into the arms of Vicky Vette and another happy ending!

Then again, one day, and perhaps one day soon, TitS will realise that for all his small victories in battles on the war on porn that he is fighting a losing fight. Internet pornography will always be there as will those with an appetite for it and the desire to develop mechanisms to access it. The porn industry is very much like Medusa's head in that for every snake you cut off, another one grows back in its place (I am sure someone is going to want to argue the point about severing Medusa's head altogether, right?).

Canings in Aceh...

There is a need to respect the laws of any place you live or visit, but there are those times when one wonders whether the laws in question have earned the right to demand the sort of respect that they do. That said, Aceh's Sharia Police have caned a few people of late for the 'crimes' of adultery and gambling.

The idea that these two particular activities are crimes in the human realm is indicative of our over-zealousness to do God's work. For the true believers, it would seem that you do not trust God to do that which God does, punish those who sin against him (or her) by breaking the rules. In any event, they are God's rules so perhaps God should also be responsible for meting out the punishment.

The idea of a public caning always reminds me of going to the movies when I was a kid and watching a western. In particular, the ones where there is a public hanging, which in turn draws big crowds of onlookers. I have never really since the spectacle value of public executions or in this case canings. I have always wondered, but never enough to do a psychology degree, whether this was just a simple case of blood-thirstiness with the prospect of watching someone die or be physically beaten to a bloody mess. Maybe that can be my next course of study.

Nevertheless, canings in Aceh are reportedly to be more about public humiliation than they are about inflicting pain. Supporters of caning argue that there is a huge deterrent effect because of the physical nature of the punishment. Yet, the reality is there are very strict rules in place for where men and women can be caned with respect to body parts and how hard these lashes can be. Truth be told, when I was in high school, corporal punishment was still an available option for teachers to control unruly students (or those who were too big a smart arses for their own good, like me). So, I am thinking with the cane in the "right" person's hand, some serious pain and physical damage can be inflicted.

The adulterers each received eight strokes of the best from the cane master (or is that cane master lash?). The maximum penalty under the relevant Qanun, No. 14 of 2003, as I recall is nine strokes. There is also a minimum of three. So, I guess the offence was at the top end of the scale but it was not the most serious form of adulterous behaviour.

The gamblers received eight and seven lashes of the cane respectively. Interestingly, this means that gambling and adultery are pretty much on the same seriousness level in this case. These gentlemen were in breach of the provisions of Qanun No. 13 of 2003.

These canings follow a series of canings that took place in June. It would seem that the Acehnese authorities are ratcheting up the caning activities in the lead up to Ramadan.

One final point, if it was me about to be caned and I was walking up to the public caning platform in order to receive my punishment for whatever it is that I had been sentenced for, I would not know whether to laugh or cry having had a look at the fashion sense of the executioner! There seriously must be potential for the launch of a whole "executioner" line of tailored fashions.

Ho hum...

Singapore Casinos & Indonesian Gamblers...

It appears a good bet that some of the biggest and most consistent visitors to the new casinos opening in Singapore are going to be Indonesians. The Resorts World Sentosa is the first of two casinos to open its doors in Singapore. The casino is expected to be open today in order to capitalize on the celebrations surrounding the Chinese New Year. So, today is likely to be an interesting day for many punters as it might be a view into what sort of luck, or lack thereof, they are going to enjoy in the Year of the Tiger.

The second casino is the Marina Bay Sands which is affiliates with the Sands casinos out of Las Vegas. The Sands is not expected to open until April 2010, which means the Sentosa is certainly going to enjoy a bit of a head start.

It would be fair to say that it is not only going to be Indonesians of Chinese ancestry that may partake in a hand or two of Blackjack and Baccarat or a couple of rounds at the Roulette table, there is an expectation that Indonesians of all faiths and types of ancestry will take the plunge and part with some of their fortune in search of new fortunes. This is expected to include those of the Muslim faith.

Singapore is a prime destination for many Indonesians. It is close, and it remains a shopping mecca (this is in spite of the numerous malls and branded stores already in Jakarta) for the well-to-do Indonesians looking to spend a weekend away. The casinos provide a little something extra, for those who have shopped themselves out during the day, to do in the evening. Nothing like glamming it up and hitting the casinos and spending up big.

However, it might be worth mentioning that there are thousands (perhaps tens of thousands?) of Indonesian maids working in Singapore. A wander down Orchard Road on a Sunday afternoon is like taking a walk on a busy Indonesian street on any day of the week in that one hears a steady stream of Indonesian and local dialects such as Sundanese, Javanese, and some Batak thrown into the mix. The point being, will any of these maids be tempted to win their fortune by gambling their meager incomes on the flip of a card or the spin of a wheel?

The temptation of winning the "big one" is quite often too much temptation for some to bear. So, is it a fair question to ponder, has the Singaporean government put into place mechanisms to deal with not only the increased revenue they are expecting the casinos to generate, but also mechanisms to deal with the social problems that are going to arise as they relate to problem gambling?

Perhaps Draconian police measures are not going to be enough to keep crime rates down. Any increase in crime is going to make Singapore a less attractive place to visit. The reality is (or at least was) that I enjoyed going to Singapore for no other reason than it was sometimes nice to get a little respite from the chaos and pollution of Jakarta, and it was always nice to be able to walk down the road, in this case Orchard Road, late in the evening and feel safe as houses.

But, the 'interesting' point of the expected influx of Indonesians to the gambling tables of Singapore is that many of these gamblers are likely to be Muslims. Gambling is expressly forbidden in Islam. So, to engage in it would be somewhat sinful, particularly if one was doing it with the full knowledge that it was sinful. This has been the primary deterrent in legislating for a casino to be built in the Thousand Islands area off the coast of Jakarta; the sinfulness of gambling.

It is too bad that money from gambling is haram because the increased revenue that would most likely be generated from a casino in Jakarta could be used to offset the social problems that allowing gambling would create, but also direct some much needed funding to education and health programs to ensure that "all" Indonesians had access to some basic facilities (naive, maybe; but what has been put into place to date is not working, and has not worked, so what is there to lose?).

The combined intellect of the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Indonesian Ulema Council / MUI) has stated that to gamble is to sin. Gambling is expressly forbidden in Islam (and in Indonesian law) so any Indonesian Muslim would be in a spot of bother in Indonesia. However, Amidhan of the MUI, has offered up that the MUI is only concerned with Indonesian Muslims gambling in Indonesia because what Indonesian Muslims do while they are abroad is beyond the MUI's control. I guess this means that any Indonesian Muslim that gambles abroad answers directly to Allah and no longer to the MUI?

The casinos are not just casinos, but rather full-service fun, entertainment, and business venues that can cater to a broad range of interests and needs. The idea seemingly being that "you" can hold a business conference there, and there just happens to be a casino close by for punters to partake in their hobbies during the non-business related sessions of their trip. The Sentosa includes a theme park which makes it a family-oriented weekend away (or as the cynics have suggested - somewhere to dump the kids while mum and dad go and spend the kids' inheritance).

Singapore hopes that the imminent opening of the casinos will be a shot in the arm for recently dwindling tourist arrivals in the city state. Time will tell!

Underage Gambling in Indonesia -- Big Time Crime?

Gambling is illegal in Indonesia. This does not mean it does not happen. There is probably a case to made for instances of gambling and then gambling. The point here is that organized gambling is clearly against the law and any attempt to regulate it into existence has met with fierce opposition. Then there is gambling that kids partake in like having a flutter on the outcome of a coin toss. The first one sees hundreds of millions of Rupiah change hands and the other is lucky if it sees tens of Rupiah change hands.

A recent case that was heard in Tangerang District court has ended with ten children being convicted of gambling. Their punishment to date is that they have been sent home with their parents. The result is clearly not the right one. The case should never have even seen the light of day. But, it did and it highlights the lunacy of the law enforcement system in Indonesia. Anyone who argues that reform is taking hold is kidding themselves.

The lawyer of the children intends to appeal the decision. If I can help out from afar, then I would be more than willing to do so. The idea that these children were ever in detention was outrageous. The fact that they have been convicted is just as outrageous. The Attorney General should have instructed prosecutors to drop the case. The fact that he did not indicates where the priorities lay. I would also suggest that the masks provided hardly are sufficient to conceal the identities of these children, so the Tangerang prosecutors have failed in this regard as well.

There must be something in the water out Tangerang way. These are the prosecutors from the same Tangerang office that placed a young mother of two, Prita Mulyasari, in jail for writing a letter complaining about the service she received from the Omni International Hospital. There must be absolutely no serious crime in Tangerang that these prosecutors have nothing better to spend their time on than jailing young children and mothers.

This is a case that must capture more people's imagination and not just in Indonesia but further afield. An excellent piece, some might call it an enlightened and educated rage against the machine was written by a resident expat in Indonesia, Patrick Guntensperger, and can be found here.

The stupidity of the whole affair is that there are hardened criminals and organized criminal activities continuing to go about their ways without any concern at all about being arrested or brought to justice. Now, whether this is because they have connections to the right people or pay the necessary "fees" to avoid trouble, I will leave to you and your imaginations. However, the lawyer for the ten children, Kristin Tambunan, has a point when she asks, "since when is playing a crime?" This becomes even more absurd when one considers that these children are currently convicted criminals because they were tossing coins to fill in time between shoe shining gigs.

The conviction of these children is, plain and simple, wrong. The appeal must be accepted on the grounds that the judges erred in allowing the case to proceed, as the prevailing laws and regulations clearly state that the prosecution of children is a last resort. The verdict must be vacated and these children need to be allowed to get on with their lives without the noose of convicted felon hanging around their neck.

What is the Office of the Public Prosecutor thinking?

Children and the Justice System in Indonesia

Despite the title of this post, it is not some academic expose on juvenile justice. It is a commentary on a particular case that is currently before the Tangerang District Court in Indonesia. It involves children and an alleged gambling session.

The relevant law in Indonesia is Law No. 3 of 1997 on Juvenile Justice. The law states that a juvenile that is subject to the provisions of the law is any child between the ages of eight and eighteen. However, where children are found to have committed an offense that is subject to the provisions of this law and they are under the age of eight, then the child may still be subject to some form of action. This action will not include a court appearance. However, it might include removal from the home and placement with child services.

However, once the child has reached an age of eight then they can be brought before a court of law and tried for their alleged offenses. The trial is to be closed and the identities of the children are to be protected. Interestingly, the above photo is from the hearing and it shows the children wearing masks in order to protect their identity. For me, though, a closed hearing must mean just that, it is closed to all bar the prosecution; the defense counsel, the judges and associated court staff, and the child or children's immediate families. This is seemingly not the way it has been done to date in this case.

However, the lack of real protection of the children's identities is hardly surprising. Having lived in Indonesia and watched a good deal of crime reporting on television or reading about crime in the paper, it is clear that a very poor job is done with respect to "really" protecting the identities of children in criminal matters. I am certainly not in favor of naming and shaming of minor children. On a slightly different note, I also believe that children who have been victim of crime have an absolute right to have their identities protected.

In a case that is currently before the Tangerang District Court that involves the prosecution of ten children ranging in ages from eight to eleven. These children were allegedly caught gambling. Their game of choice was guessing the value of a coin at IDR 1000 a game. This is hardly big stakes gambling, and you would think that the police, public prosecutors, and the courts have bigger fish to fry in the crime stakes than these ten children. Then again, maybe not.

The children were caught in the middle of their high-stakes game within the surrounds of the Soekarno-Hatta International Airport in June. Sadly, the reason they were there was because they were trying to make a few extra Rupiah shining shoes of much wealthier travellers on their way out of Jakarta or out of the country. The majority of these kids are regulars in primary school and would hardly classify as hardened criminals in the making.

In any event, the criminal prosecution of these children should have been a case of last resort. A slap on the wrist and a warning to their parents and guardians that this sort of thing is not on and if they get caught again then perhaps it is time for social or children's services to become involved. The idea that these ten children could end up in a juvenile detention facility for gambling less than one dollar is more wrong that the offense that they have allegedly committed.

ATMs and Poker Machines

Out of one and into the other!

Gambling is a problem and problem gamblers face more challenges than most in avoiding the pit falls of their addiction. I have always wondered about the common sense of having an ATM in the same room as a lot of poker machines. The temptation for a problem gambler to pour all their cash into one machine after having taken it out of the other must be huge.


So, it is with interest that I read the Senator-elect from South Australia, Nick Xenophon, who seemingly was elected on his anti-pokies platform, intends to introduce a private members bill when he takes up his position on 1 July 2008.


The essence of the bill would be to ban ATMs from pubs and clubs. I fully support such a move. It will be interesting to see whether the move gets universal support in the parliament. Pokies are big business and from the pub and club perspective it makes a lot of sense to have an ATM on site to ensure that punters have access to cash. The bill would not effect the pub's and club's abilities with regard to EFTPOS or electronic funds transfer machines. The senator-elect recognizes that EFTPOS is important for allowing patrons to pay for drinks, food, and accommodation.


The winner is always just around the corner which is probably why having an ATM in a pub or club is such a dangerous thing.

Information and Electronic Transactions

The House of Representatives (DPR) have finally been able to pass the Bill on Information and Electronic Transactions into what will become the prevailing law in this area (Undang-undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik / UU ITE). The Bill first came before this DPR in September 2005 and this is the 96th bill to be passed into law by the DPR since 2004. It is worth pointing out that such a long gestation period is not uncommon for bills wanting to be passed into law. Unfortunately, it is not always the case of better late than never.

Much of the public commentary over the past few days has focused on Article 27(1) which prohibits the transmission, distribution, and the making available of material in an electronic form that breaches prevailing moral standards. However, the bill does not seem to criminalize those that choose to download this morally questionable material unless where once it is downloaded it is then transmitted to someone else.

However, the bill is about so much more than trying to limit the spread of what is considered to be morally suspect material. The bill deals with subject matter such as electronic signatures, electronic contracts, domain names, and electronic transactions. The overriding theme of the bill is to increase legal certainty and security for electronic transactions.

Much of the focus of the bill will not be on what it permits but rather on what it prohibits. In addition to the focus on pornography noted earlier the bill explicitly prohibits any electronic communication that threatens physical violence or strikes fear into the reader of the communication. The potential criminal liability for this is up to 12 years imprisonment and / or fines of up to IDR 2 billion.

Other prohibitions are expected such as the interception and tapping of communications and then the misuse or abuse of personal data. This would include such things as identity theft.

The biggest question that the bill poses is enforcement; particularly where there conceivably are competing privacy rights. The bill is clear as to what is permitted and what is prohibited. Any Internet user is aware of the great amount of anonymity in cyber space and myriad of web logs (blogs) are testament to this.

However, the bill would seem to grant the necessary powers and authorities to search and seize any tools or equipment allegedly used in the commission of an offence. Yet, it must be noted that the bill stipulates that investigators must comply with prevailing laws and regulations as they relate to privacy, confidentiality, the provision of public services, and the integrity of data. Therefore, this must be interpreted as preventing investigators from conducting fishing expeditions for example by requesting all the data of an Internet service provider (ISP) in the hope of finding supporting evidence of a crime.

The definition of what constitutes evidence has been expanded beyond that of the provisions in current legislation to include specifically electronic information and electronic documents.

The world is a very different place than it was 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 20 years ago, or 50 years ago. We as a race of people are well and truly into the electronic age and much of our personal and professional existence relies on sophisticated technology. We can to all intents and purposes live online and never have to physically leave the places that we live, if we wanted to of course.

We can shop online for everything we need and do not need from groceries to books to pornography; we can work online; yes, just about everything we need to do is something that can be done online or electronically. Most of us if we thought about it would be able to identify an occasion where rather than get up out of our office chair and walk to a colleagues office we sent an email instead or an SMS in preference to calling and talking to a colleague or a friend. This in and of itself evidences how much of our lives are now dependent on technology.

We must therefore ask ourselves how safe are we in this virtual world? How safe are our identities? And, How safe are our transactions? If we do not ask ourselves these questions then we expose ourselves to considerable danger. For those that have never considered these issues the government has done so on your behalf and this bill is an attempt to provide regulatory certainty to information and electronic transactions that are conducted using the sophisticated technology now at our disposal.

The world has quickly become a borderless place in the sense that electronic transactions are instantaneous and cross traditional sovereign State lines without ever having to ask for directions or permission. This is in spite of some sovereign states trying to filter information and electronic transactions through selected and approved service providers. Most experts tend to agree that censorship and regulation in this way has often proved ineffective at best.

This phenomenon has given birth to cyber law and this bill fits within Indonesia’s developing cyber law regulatory framework.

A quick scan or reading of the ‘General Provisions’, which in an Indonesian law is usually where all the definitions of the terms are listed, highlights that the bill is about so much more than protecting Indonesians from themselves with respect to the perceived dangers of morally suspect behaviours such as pornography, gambling, and violence.

The definitions include entries for what constitutes an electronic transaction, what constitutes an electronic document, what constitutes an electronic agent, what constitutes an electronic certificate, what constitutes an electronic signature and the authentication and validity of any such signatures used in an electronic transaction, as well as who constitutes a sender and a receiver of an electronic document or piece of information.

Each of these definitions are important as this is a new area of law for most, including practitioners of the law who will ultimately be tasked with prosecuting or defending cases in this field along with the judges who will decide who is in breach of the provisions and who is not.

Article 2 purports to include a degree of extra-territoriality as it explicitly states that the provisions of this law apply to all persons who commit an act against the provisions of this law whether they are within the jurisdiction of the Republic of Indonesia or outside of it provided that the act committed is an offence either within the Republic of Indonesia or outside of it and it causes a loss to an Indonesian interest. The Elucidation to the Law states that the utilization of information technology is trans-national and therefore universal, which thereby allows Indonesia’s jurisdictional reach to extend beyond its physical borders and into the realm of cyber space.

It is likely that this extra-territorial jurisdiction that is proclaimed here is going to be heavily reliant on mutual legal assistance and bilateral extradition treaties.

The basic purpose of the bill is to:
a. to develop a smarter nation able to participate more fully in the world of information;
b. expand national trade and the national economy to improve the social welfare of the citizens;
c. increase the levels of effective and efficient public services;
d. provide broader and greater opportunities for citizens to develop their talents and skills; and
e. to provide security, justice, and legal certainty to users and providers of information technology.

The bill gets straight to the point in Article 5(1) in stating that electronic information, electronic documents, or any printed version of either is to be considered legally valid evidence. However, there are exceptions. In this case if there are certain documents that must be in written form or notarized, then an electronic version of these documents is presumably not acceptable evidence for the purposes of a criminal or civil hearing.

Interestingly, a business person who offers a product via an electronic system is obligated to provide all relevant information associated with the product being offered including any contract conditions, the producer of the product, and the product itself. Furthermore, these types of businesses must be certified by an accredited agency.

Electronic signatures are to be considered the same as any ordinary written signature and consequently binding at law provided it meets certain conditions. Generally, these conditions will require that evidence be adduced that the electronic signature at all relevant times was only under the control of the person who is alleged to be the owner of that signature.

In consideration of the binding nature of an electronic signature, the Law is explicit that any one who is involved in the use of electronic signatures is under a special duty of care to ensure the safety and security of the signature and the identity of the relevant person. Businesses and signature holders must pay particular note to this as Article 12(3) states unequivocally that any breach of the provisions relating to electronic signature exposes the person that causes the breach to be liable for all losses associated with the breach. This includes any legal consequences that arise in addition to the losses accrued.

The critical feature of electronic transactions is that they can be either public or private but in any case they are binding on the parties who are signatories to them. An electronic transaction that binds the parties also allows those parties to choose the forum to resolve any disputes or grievances that may arise in the course of their contractual relationship. This includes court based mechanisms or arbitration or any other form of alternative dispute resolution. It must be noted that where one of the parties is international then the prevailing law is to be International Commercial Law.

As was noted earlier much of the public debate and perhaps much private debate has centered more on what is prohibited under the provisions of the law as opposed to what is permitted. Furthermore, much of this debate has focused on the pornography components to the detriment of other critical prohibitions contained in the Law.

In terms of pornography the target of the legislation is clearly the disseminators, distributors, and transmitters of the offending material as opposed to the downloader of the suspect pictures. Nevertheless, businesses should be aware that for their own protection filters should be installed so that a legitimate claim to making an attempt to restrict access from office servers was made. It was pointed out earlier that historically software filters have been ineffective. This is not the point though.

It might prove for interesting legal argument if a company’s internal server did not block offending material but allowed it to pass through to individual employee inboxes as to whether this would be a breach of the distributing or transmission provisions, particularly if the receiver of the offending material was then to forward it to all their friends back through the internal servers of the company and out into cyber space. It may be better to adopt “a better to be safe than sorry” attitude in this regard.

Aside from pornography the Law also explicitly prohibits gambling, defamation and slander, as well as threats of violence or just threats generally.

Furthermore, the Law prohibits the spreading of lies that are likely to result in a loss to consumers partaking in an electronic transaction. The Law also prohibits the spreading of information that is likely to lead to clashes between groups based on matters of race, ethnicity, and religion, among others.

The Law also explicitly prohibits the sending of threats or other information that is intended to cause fear in the receiver of that information.

Hacking in all its forms are prohibited with the simple provision that prohibits access by any means by anyone to the electronic system of another. This is then elaborated to include specific motivations such as to obtain personal data and information. The Law also prohibits interception of electronic documents and the tapping of electronic communications. These provisions obviously include exceptions in order to facilitate the work of law enforcement.

Piracy in all its forms also is prohibited. This includes the standard prohibitions against the piracy of hardware and software but also includes the reproduction of computer codes access codes, among others.

The Law provides for terms of imprisonment up to 12 years and fines of up to IDR 12 billion for the standard breaches noted earlier. However, where there are aggravating circumstances these terms of imprisonment and fines can be extended by a 1/3 or 2/3 depending on the breach and who it is committed against.

The closing provisions provide that all of the subsidiary legislation that is required to give force to this Law must be issued and enacted no later than two years after the law comes in to force. This law will come into full force once signed by the President or after 30 days from 25 March 2008.

It is clear from the provisions in the new Law that the government is taking seriously the need to regulate in the sphere of cyber space. The reality is that as time passes more and more of peoples’ personal and professional lives will be conducted online. The impact is that over time governments’ are also going to have to provide more and more of their public services online to satisfy the demand of people not wanting to travel to a government office to complete a form or apply for a permit.

This in turn means that there will be vast amounts of personal information, whether it be about individuals or corporations that if abused would conceivably result in very significant losses.

Therefore, this is a responsible piece of legislation. It may not be perfect and some of the imperfections have already been alluded to, but in comparison to a completely unregulated area of law, this is a significant improvement.