Jumat, 08 Agustus 2008

Press in Indonesia in the Post Suharto Era: an Independent Civil Society?

Press in Indonesia in the Post Suharto Era: an Independent Civil Society?

Mailinda Eka Yuniza[1]

Abstract

This paper will examine the unique condition of press in Indonesia in post-Suharto era. It is interesting that the enactment of the guaranty of freedom of press in Law by the state is not followed by stronger position of press in public, which uniquely is unparallel with the prediction of neo-Tocquevillean zero-sum theory. Although the number of press publisher has been increased dramatically after the renouncement of SIUPP in 1999, Annual Report in 2000-2001 showed that it decreased significantly in the end of 2000.[2] Furthermore, World Wide Freedom Index, which put out by Reporters Sans Frontières, Reporters Without Borders, showed that Indonesia’ rank of independency of media, freedom of information and the safety of journalist tends to decrease every year. [3] Therefore, I will argue that formal regulation is not enough to develop independent press as an important part of a strong civil society. Good will from the all three spheres (state, market and civil society) particularly state to support the role of the press, the mature of the civil society itself which could be seen from its tolerance towards different ideas and the existence of “civil culture” are also required to maximize the role of the press in Indonesia.

Kata Kunci: Civil Society, Freedom of Press, Civil Culture

I. Introduction

The idea of civil society is believed as the latest solution for democracy.[4] The origin of the concept of civil society could be traced back at the ancient Greek era and was reinvented by scholars in Eastern Europe and Latin America in 1970s and 1980s. The fall of communism and authoritarianism followed by the process of democracy in some countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America and East Asia; the disappointment of economic models in the past; rapid industrialization which brought with it social transformation, and the fast growth of non-governmental organization (NGOs) are some reasons of the great spread of this idea.[5] Although the concept has been widely discussed and debated, there is no clarity of the meaning of this concept. The meaning of civil society is opaque and highly depends on who defines the concept and for what purposes.[6] Wide claims of the meaning of this concept which sometimes contradict each other encourage critics from some scholars about the role of this concept toward democracy and development. [7] However, most of scholars believe that the complex definition of civil society does not necessarily reduce its practical usage. Indeed, it offers flexibility to be used in different context and situation.

There are at least three different definitions of the concept of civil society:[8] first, civil society as a third sphere between state and market; second, civil society as good society; and third, civil society as public sphere in which different ideas could be discussed and contested. Related to this differentiation, there is a heat discussion among scholars about the boundary of the concept of civil society, what is inside and what is outside the concept. However, besides the differences, most of the scholars agree that press[9] is an important part of civil society.

In Gramsci definition of civil society as a public sphere, the role of press is important since the press is the key actor in providing balance information to fulfill public right of information. Press also has important role as the watchdog of the state action, checking on abuses of power and position. It is public right to get balance information of all idea, mainstream and alternatives idea and to get proper information about what is happen. If only certain truth facilitated in public sphere or certain truth heard louder than the others, public interest can be suffered. Therefore, press co-opted by state or press tendency to certain political group, could cause public suffering.

Silencing alternative idea and terminating variety of public discourse by co-opting press is used by authoritarian government as a tool to protect their power. This is the case in Indonesia in Suharto era. The licensing system, which is called SIUPP (Surat Izin Usaha Penerbitan Pers) and censorship were used by the government to tame the press. However, considerable change happened after Suharto resigned from his presidency in 1998 (Reformation era). In 1999, Law Number 44/1999 about Press Law was issued. This law guarantees the freedom of press by abolishing SIUPP and renouncing censorship. Regarding neo-Tocquevilian zero-sum theory (a theory which saw civil society as the opposition of state and therefore if state has greater power, consequently it reduced the civil society’ power and otherwise, if state loosen their power civil society can get greater power), loosen of state power toward civil society will be followed by greater power of civil society. How is the case of Indonesian Press after Suharto era? Is the enactment of Law Number 40/1999 about Press followed by greater power owned by press and press independence?

It is interesting that the enactment of the guaranty of freedom of press in Law by the state in Indonesia is not followed by stronger position of press in public, which uniquely is unparallel with the prediction of neo-Tocquevillean zero-sum theory. Although the number of press publisher has been increased dramatically after the renouncement of SIUPP in 1999, Annual Report in 2000-2001 showed that it decreased significantly from 1,687 publishers established after 1999, to only 705 publishers which can survive until the end of 2000.[10] Furthermore, World Wide Freedom Index, which put out by Reporters Sans Frontières, Reporters Without Borders, showed that Indonesia’ rank of independency of media, freedom of information and the safety of journalist tends to decrease every year. [11]

II. Press and Civil Society in Indonesia

a. Theory of the Concept of Civil Society and Press

Lee Hock Guan states in Introduction of Civil Society in Southeast Asia that the concept of civil society defies any clear definitive meanings since it has both normative and descriptive dimensions, which is a feature of “essentially contested concept”.[12] The usage of the concept becomes more contentious since the concept is complex and widely offers flexibility in usage for different intentions and situations. On the other hand, the concept has considerable request because it “embodies for many an ethical ideal of social order, one that, if not overcome, at least harmonizes the conflicting demands of individual interest and social goods”.[13]

The concept of civil society originally is a western concept which then widely spread across the world. Lee Hock Guan describes two different views of the concept of civil society in Western countries: a “conflict” view which was emerged from the Central and East European context and “social capital” view which was established from the American context.[14] The first view sees civil society as voluntary organizations which have important role in the process of democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. This school of thought believes that there is a strong relation between the existence of civil society organization which provide advocacy and promote public interest and the presence of democratic state. In this point of view, the existence of civil society appears as the opposition of the state. On the other hand, the “social capital” view was established in America and based on argument that “liberal democracy is made possible because of the presence of civic values such as trust, tolerance, civic mindedness, reciprocity, and trust in government”.[15] Therefore, the second view emphasizes the importance of complementary relation between the state and civil society to achieve democracy.

Another scholar, Michael Edward, in “civil society” describes three most recognized school of thought concerning about civil society.[16] The first concept perceives civil society as a third sphere between state and market which consists of voluntary organizations that are opponents of the state. The second school of thought believes that civil society is a kind of society as opposed of “uncivil society”. This model concerns with the behavioral aspect of a society. The third approach argues that civil society is an arena for association, institutional collaboration as well as debate and contestation among ideas developed in community. The existence of public sphere is important to elaborate ideas, both mainstream and alternative ideas, which both are important for democracy. This concept was emerged as further exploration of the Marxist concept of civil society which is triggered the concept used by East European countries in the first view (the “conflict view”).

Regarding the concept of civil society described by Lee Hock Guan and Michael Edward, it appears that the meaning of the concept of civil society is multifaceted which could be understood extremely different by each country. The meaning and the aim of this concept is shaped by the three important spheres: state, market and civil society itself. The dominancy of power in the society by each spheres or a specific background of the country could have a very important role in shaping the meaning and the aim of the concept. While the state could be the opponent of the civil society, it is worth noting that in some cases there are civil societies supporting the state or even co-opted by the state. Civil society in one country is not always homogeneous. Different civil society could have different aim which might be contradict each other and even if they have the same aim, there is possibility that they will use different approach to achieve their aims. Moreover, market also could have a very important role in influencing state policy toward civil society.

Press is one of important actor in the civil society. It is generally recognized that media (including press), civil society and democracy is closely related. Erfried Adam states that it is impossible to think about democracy, freedom and social justice without independent media: “Pluralism and peaceful cooperation can only be embedded within society when state, economy and civil society can interchange with each other toward the media”.[17] However, the relationship between state, economy, civil society and press in achieving and maintaining democracy is more complicated than what it looked like in the first glance. The question of autonomy of the media (including press) is always debated in its relation with state, economy and civil society.

Press independence is also based on Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Right (UDHR) which guarantees the right to freedom of expression:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes the right to hold opinion without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontier”.[18]

Furthermore, The United Nation Human Rights Committee has stressed the important role of independent press in the political process:

“(T)he free communication of information and ideas about public and potential issues between citizens, candidates and elected representatives is essential. This implies a free press and other media able to comment on public issues without censorship or restraint and to inform public opinion”.[19]

However, the freedom of press is not absolute. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Right (ICCPR) stated that the restriction toward press should meet some requirements which are:

“The exercise of rights provided by for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:

(a) For respect of the rights or reputation of others;

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals”.[20]

It is difficult to find consensus among journalist or scholar whether Indonesian’ press could be truly independent in Indonesia. Muchtar Lubis argues that a free and independent press should regard the state as its first enemy.[21] Fact shows that press in Indonesia is still struggling to get its independence. Fluctuation of freedom and cooptation of press by the state happened before and during Suharto era (1945-1998). However, a more conducive environment for the independence of press is started after the resignation of Suharto. After the resignation of Suharto, the protection of press freedom is stated in:[22] a. article 28F of the second amendment of The 1945 Constitution of Indonesia, b. Article 20 and 21 TAP MPR RI XVII/MPR/1998(the decision of House of Representative of Indonesia Number XVII/MPR/1998) on Human Right, c. Article 14 of Law Number 39/1999 on Human Right, d. Law Number 40/ 1999 on Press, e. Law Number 12/2005 on Ratification of International Civil and Political Rights.

III. Press and Regulation in Indonesia

Describing the history and the condition of press in Indonesia is similar to walk in a long journey from the colonial period to the recent situation particularly after the enactment of the new law, Law Number 40/1999 on Press. This long journey is full of picture of Indonesian’ press struggle to achieve its independency. Fluctuation of freedom and constraint from the state is inline with the political condition of Indonesia.

a. Press before Suharto Era

The first emergence of Indonesian’ newspaper was in the 1930s[23] particularly in relation with Sumpah Pemuda, a congress of youth organization which was attended by the youth representative from all parts of Indonesia. The most important decision in the congress is the recognition of the nation of ‘one nation-Indonesia, one people-Indonesia, and one language-Indonesia’. The role of press in this time is as a means for struggle against the colonial Dutch and also as the tool to promote Indonesian language. Since the aim of the press is not only to give information to public, but also to criticize the colonial,[24] the press was faced a strong restrain from the state, the colonial. The colonial saw the press as ‘a horses’ which need to be guided and restrained if they go out from the expected way. Therefore, the colonial issued a regulation of Pers-breidel ordonantie (press-bridling ordinance) which authorized the state to ban certain article which is considered to be dangerous or subversive. Moreover, the journalist who wrote the article could be exiled. This condition was getting worst in the Japanese occupation (1942-1945) since the entire publishing in Dutch language was banned by the state and was replaced by the government daily newspaper “Asia Raya” which full of the government propaganda.

After the independence of Indonesia at 17th August 1945, some Indonesian newspaper was established.[25] They claimed their self as independent and non partisan although it could be said that virtually all the newspaper in this era were helping the government to promote their policy and propaganda.[26] Notwithstanding press across the world in the mid-1950s competed for pro and anti communist ideology, Sukarno, the President of Indonesia, assured the US government about the neutrality of Indonesian press.[27] However, this condition changed significantly when in 1960s, Sukarno showed his ideology position as pro communist. At this time, all newspaper which was not supporting communist ideology was banned and the journalist opposed Sukarno’s ideology could be jailed as political prisoner. On the other hand, newspapers which supported communist ideology were encouraged. It is worth noting that there was no specific law issued by the state which warrant press independent or even regulate the press. The base for the press activities is solely on article 28 of the 1945 Constitution of Indonesia which warrant the citizen’s right to express their opinion and to create or involve in organization.[28]

b. Press during Suharto Era

In 1966 the presidency of Sukarno was end and was transferred to Suharto who has arranged a SUPERSEMAR, Surat Perintah Sebelas Maret (a letter of command at 11 March 1966 which authorized Suharto to take over the role of Sukarno as the President of Indonesia). Suharto was the one who lead the struggle to combat rebels in the political coup on 30 September 1965 which involved PKI (Indonesia Communist Party), a party which was strongly supported by Sukarno. Regarding this background, the new government under Suharto had a very different ideology and policy compared to Sukarno, the previous president. While in Sukarno era newspapers supported communism idea was encouraged, in the Suharto era, all newspapers supported or even sympathetic to PKI were banned.[29] Furthermore, all journalists and media workers who were communist, involved with communists or even alleged to be communists were arrested or killed.

The first regulation on press issued by state after the Independence Day (17th August 1945) is Law Number 11/1966 on Press. This law consists of 21 articles which regulate about the function, right and responsibility of press, press commission, right to publish news, press publication enterprise, journalists, foreign press and journalists and some criminal code. The law was issued and effective at 12th December 1966. Although some articles in this law appeared as the protector of press independence,[30] application of the law showed otherwise. The possibility for the state to control the press is accommodated by chapter 9 article 20.1a of the law which stated: “In the transition period, permit to publish is still required…”. The longer of the transition period is not specified. Therefore, in this unspecified period, there are two permit required for publishing newspapers: the permit to publish (SIT) from the ostensibly civilian Department of Information and the permit to print (SIC) which is issued by the military security authority, KOPKAMTIB.

The amendments of Law Number 11/1966 on Press happened in 1967 and in 1982 by Law Number 4/1967 and Law Number 21/1982. Some keywords of the Indonesian radical terminology used in the Law Number 11/1966 was replaced in these amendment, such as: the lexicon “a tool of revolution” replaced by “a tool of National struggle”, “an activator of the mass” replaced by “activator of national development”, “a guardian of revolution” changed with “a guardian of the ideology Pancasila” and “Pancasila socialist press” replaced by “Pancasila press”.[31] Furthermore, while several matters in the Law Number 11/1966 “were to be decided together by government and Press Council”[32], in the Law Number 21/1982 these matters “were to be decided by government after listening the advice from Press Council”.[33] Another fundamental change brought by Law Number 21/1982 is the replacement of “the transitional requirement of SIT (permit to publish) issued by Department of Information” with SIUPP (Surat Izin Usaha Penerbitan Press, a Press Publication Enterprise Permit). The difference between these two licenses is the object of the licenses. The object of the first license is more about the individual content while the object of the second license is enterprise. Furthermore, to get the SIUPP there are more supporting letters and preliminary permits needed, such as: letters of support from all relevant professional organizations (the Indonesian Journalists Association and the Press Publishers Association) at both national and regional letter, several permits from civilian and military authorities, together with supporting letters from the financing bank and the printing company.[34] Briefly, the existence of SIUPP system made possible for the government to control the press stronger than before.

The more controversial rule was issued by the Minister of Information in Minister of Information’s Regulation Number 1/1984 concerning on application of Law Number 21/1982. This Minister Regulation authorized the right of the Minister of Information to withdraw SIUPP and to ban any paper, without recourse to public defense or trial. Commenting this condition Daniel Lev stated that “as in modern states generally law and legal process are an essential ingredient of the (Gramscian) hegemony….The New Order state justifies its exercise of political prerogative by a claim to rule of law” [35] The notion of constitutionalism (1945 constitution) and legalism was used by the rulers of the government to formulate expected ideology since its very inception. Legality is used as a means to normalize the power relation between the state and civil society. The judiciary functions as an arm of government and legal process is a tool to physically constrain, delegitimize and marginalize dissenters.[36]

It is worth noting that in the New Order Era, particularly in 1969, government under a Department of Information Ministerial Decree Number 02/PER/MENPEN/1969 obliged Indonesian journalists to be the member of the PWI (Persatuan Wartawan Indonesia, Indonesian Journalist Institution).[37] This institution was established in 1946 in an attempt to mobilize professional journalists in the nationalist struggle against the colonial Dutch in which the press had an important role to fashioned domestic and international opinion. However, since 1966, the PWI as the other professional institution has been strictly regulated and directed by the government.

While in the early of the new order era the press asked the government to recognize them as “a good partner in accelerating development”, the government wanted the press to be “free and responsible”. However, it is not clear “free to do what” and “responsible to whom”.[38] Regarding this ambiguity, Toeti Kakiailatu commented: “this instituted a system of what can be called ‘self censorship’ whereby a journalist or editor had to develop a “sixth sense” about what type of content might lead to one of these licenses being revoked, and readers had to develop an astute ability ‘to read between the lines’.[39] Furthermore, there was certain issue that recognized as taboo in new order era (It is related to sensitive issue which abbreviated as SARA which is stand for ethnic, religious, race and group). However, the taboo is not regulated formally by law, but instead by “a telephone culture”. [40]

Beside a self-censorship mechanism, linguistic restraint, warnings and bans, the independence of the press is also shaped by marketplace. Since 1978, it could be said that the declining number of press publications[41] was caused by accumulation of capital rather than by state bans. Exclusion was made for three bans happened in 1994. There was a consensus between the Information Minister and the Newspaper Publisher Association (SPS) to limit the number of permit issued.[42] This consensus was following a call from Press Council to suspend new SIUPP to protect the interest of the established members of SPS and Press Council. Cristian Wibisono commented the consensus among SPS, Press Council and the Minister of Information as a cartel, a protector of the established periodicals against new competitors. [43] Since the SIUPP can not officially bought and sold and since the government limited the number of SIUPP issued, large publisher enterprises start to forming “joint venture and capital investment” with smaller unfortunate enterprises in the aim to expand their capital.[44] Therefore, the smaller regional newspapers were collapsing or absorbed by a limited number of giant enterprises.

c. Press after Suharto Era

Suharto resigned from his presidency at 21st May 1998 following the massive demonstration of in Indonesia which forced him to quit. The resignation of Suharto was also the starting point for transition in Indonesia to be more democratic. People hopes that press will be more independent inline with the process of democratization after the resignation of Suharto.

Suharto was replaced by B.J. Habibie. Although Habibibie only led the country for nine months, he managed to free the press from censorship and reforms.[45] He appointed Yunus Yosfiah as the Minister of Information who abolishing SIUPP system (thus new press could be established without need a permit), renouncing censorship and allowing journalists to establish their own voluntary professional organization (Aliansi Jurnalis Indonesia which is different from the old government-dominated journalists’ organization PWI, an association of Indonesian Journalists). Press is recognized as the partner of the government. Furthermore, the new press law was also enacted; Law Number 40/1999 on Press which replaced the old law, Law Number 11/1966 on and its amendment, Law Number 4/1967 and Law Number 21/1982. The law is believed as the first law liberating the press from tyranny.[46]

Law Number 40/1999 on Press consists of 21 articles. The first important thing stated in the law is the recognition of freedom of press as the implementation of people sovereignty which based on the principle of democracy, justice and rule of law.[47] Furthermore, the freedom of press is guaranteed as part of human right.[48] It is worth noting that different with the old press law which stated that freedom of press should be responsible,[49] this law giving more space and protection for press by warranting press from possibility of censorships.[50] Article 4 (3) Law Number 40/1999 provides that press has right to seek, acquire and disseminate ideas and information.[51] The breach of article 4(2) and article 4 (3) of the law is punishable by up two years or maximum fines Rupiah 500,000,000 (article 18(1)).[52]

This press law also protects journalists. Article 7 (1) recognizes right of journalist to choose voluntarily their professional organization.[53] They also protected in doing their job.[54] Furthermore, the law recognized the right of Indonesian citizens and the state to established press companies.[55]

However, there are limitation for press and journalists. Firstly, in reporting events and opinions press should respect religious and moral norms and should in accordance with the presumption of innocence.[56] Secondly, press is also obliged to respect the right of reply[57] and the right of correction in relation to inaccurate information.[58] Breach of these obligations may lead to fine of up to Rupiah 500,000,000.[59]

There are some critics regarding the new law. Firstly, the limitation of press in reporting events and opinion which should respect religious and moral norms is believed as too abstract, subjective and too broad, thus inappropriate as a subject of legal obligations.[60] Some international law using phrase such as racial discrimination, hatred and violence as limitation, however this words are much narrower than terminology used as limitation in this law. Furthermore, the prescription of right to reply in this law is also problematic. In any case, certain condition should apply to the right to reply: [61]

“a. the right should only be available to respond the statement which breach a legal right of the person involved, not to comment on opinion which the reader or viewer does not like;

b. it should receive similar prominence to the original article or broadcast;

c. it should proportionate in length to the original article or broadcast;

d. it should be restricted to addressing the impugned statements in the original text; and

e. it should not be taken as an opportunity to introduce new issues or to comment on other correct facts”

In law number 40/1999, the solely explanation about the right to reply is it embedded to statements which are unfavorable to the person that claiming the right. There is no requirement that the statement be false. It is also not clear whether the aggrieved person should use this right before summoning the press or how much spaces should be given by the press to the aggrieved person. Is it should be balance with the news unfavorable with him? How long is the time given to the press to process the right to reply? All of these questions do not properly answer in the law. However, besides these critics, the law has shown a positive will from the state to protect the freedom of press.

Back to government, Habibie was not elected as Indonesian president for the next period[62] and was replaced by Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur). The most important policy took by Gus Dur related to press freedom is the liquidation of Departement of Information which has a direct control toward press.[63] In the other hand, press became more critical particularly toward government officials and policy. Since the very early stage of Gus Dur presidency, he was haunted by rumors of several corruption scandals spread by press.[64] Furthermore, the increasing number of street violence cases and crimes and the heating rumors about state official scandals led the journalists to be obsessed (or trapped) by sensational reports. The increasing tensions of the state-press relation reached a peak when the President accused “the press of character assassination, and become increasingly reclusive, autocratic and unpredictable”.[65]

Gus Dur was impeached by Indonesia’ Legislature after just one year in his presidency. Megawati Sukarno Putri, the vice president, was elevated as the next president (2001-2004). Megawati, same as Gus Dur often criticize the press openly. Furthermore, “press group allege attacks on reporters by security forces, police and public mobs are on the increase, and the political elite is turning more to the courts when critical stories about them appear”. Furthermore, Megawati reestablished the Department of Information which has strictly control the press in the Suharto’ era.

The latest president replacing Megawati is Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. Yudhoyono stated his support for press independence. Good news for press freedom in Yudhoyono presidency was the annulment of articles 134, 136 and 137 of Criminal Code which content a restriction of freedom of press. These articles stated that “anyone who disseminated, demonstrated openly or put up writing or a portrait insulting the president or vice-president could be jailed for up to six years”.[66] However, the number of journalists who physically violated, threatened and harassed by army or ‘uncivil society’ are still high. Furthermore, the penalties for press offences were strengthened and a new anti terror law gave more power to the security forces.

IV. Ambiguities of Press in Indonesia after the enactment of Law Number 40/1999

There are some important features in the Law Number 40/1999 which is moving forward than the previous press law:[67] “a. it frees the Indonesian media from the discretionary control of the Ministry of Information; b. it abolishes the system of licensing, c. it establishes fines and sanctions for those obstructing press freedom, d. it makes supervision of the press a matter for the press itself, e. it calls for an independent code of conduct for journalists”. It appears that this formal regulation give more power and protection to the press as part of civil society. Based on neo-Tocquevillian zero-sum theory, the existence of the law will be followed by a stronger position of the civil society. However, the number of publishers in Indonesia is decreased and the level of press freedom in Indonesia in the index published by Broadcaster without Borders tends to decline every year.

a. Decreasing Number of Publisher

The result of the abolishment of SIUPP and the liquidation of Department of Information right after the resignation of Suharto was the increasing number of press publishers in Indonesia, both local and national in the first year of reformation era (1999). However, a lot of press publishers are closed in the later years which mostly because of financial difficulties or market competition.

In the first year after the resignation of Suharto, the number of press publisher increased dramatically, from 289 publishers before reformation era (1998) to about 1687 in the first year after reformation.[68] The increasing number did not only happen in the case of national publisher, but also for local publisher. While in the New Order era the government subsidized local press under KMD program (Koran Masuk Desa, a program introducing newspaper in the villages) which was conducted by Department of Information,[69] after the liquidation of the department, the task to publish periodical for local community was took over by press industry. The involvement of press industry increased the number of local periodical. For example: the number of press publishers in West Java Province in 1999 was 11 becomes 55 or five times in 1999.[70] The similar case was in East Java Province where the number of press publishers increased for two and a half times from 20 in 1997 to 50 in 1999. [71] However, the increasing number of publishers is not usually parallel with the development of democracy.[72] Indeed, in Indonesian case it appears as the effect of deregulation and industrialization of media.

The number of Indonesian population increased from about 178,500,000 people in 1990 to 205,843,000 people in 2000 (the world’ fourth largest in size),[73] a potentially big market for periodicals. Furthermore, the rapid economic growth in Indonesia in the new order era has brought with it a new emergence of middle class group which has higher education and has a real purchasing power which is a great potential market for newspapers.[74] The establishment of transnational advertising agency in Indonesia since 1970s is also another interesting feature for press industries.[75] This potential market for the press industry supported by the abolishing of SIUPP and the liquidation of Department of Information was encouraging the emergence of new publishers.

Although the sales figures of periodical decreased in reformation era (because of the economic crisis in the mid 1990s), the abolishing of SIUPP and the liquidation of Department of Information triggered the emergence of many new press publishers. Related to the deregulation and the development of media industry, there are some interesting phenomena in press industry:[76] a. the emergence of press franchising of foreign periodicals such as Cosmopolitan, Playboy, F-1, Her World and Female Indonesia (the existence of some foreign periodical such as Cosmopolitan and Playboy in Indonesia triggers a lot of protests from Moslems and Moslem organizations since it accused as adult magazines which content nudity); b. the involvement of non-media industry to media industry, such as: Lippo Group which has important role in insurance industry involved in media industry; c. the development of media industry such as internet; d. the participation of media industry in the stock exchange market; e. the specification of press publishers in terms of its news and its market.

However, after arousing in the early of reformation era, some of press publishers are closed in the later years because of several reasons particularly financial difficulties and poor management.[77] From about 1,687 publishers in the 1999 decreased to about 705 publishers in 2000.[78] Different with the condition in New Order Era (an era during Suharto presidency) in which the decreasing number of press publishers are mostly caused by state’ banning, the decreasing number of press publisher after the resignation of Suharto are because of economic reason. For example: Jakarta-Jakarta magazine was closed by its owner because of financial problem and dispute between its management and staffs (this case showed how journalists are vulnerable toward its media owner counterpart; this case will be discussed in more detail in the next part). [79]

It was interesting that local periodical is also experimenting euphoria like local periodicals. The increasing number of local periodicals decreased significantly in the end of 1999. Although Agung Adi Prasetyo argued that the existence of big local publishing companies that expand their market to local market did not necessarily influence the number of sales of periodicals published by local publishers,[80] this condition inevitably increased the competition between big national publishers and local publishers. However, since the liquidation of the Department of Information, there is no institution that census the number and the development of press in Indonesia periodically. Therefore, it is difficult to know exactly the development of press industry after the resignation of Suharto.

b. Declining level of independency

Reporters without Borders are registered in France as non-profit organization and has consultant status at the United Nation.[81] In 2005, this organization won the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. The organization has branches in all five continents and also works closely with local and regional press freedom groups that are members of Reporters without Borders Networks.[82] It has a constantly update website at www.rsf.org which up dated everyday. This organization concerns with press related cases. Besides that, the organization also issued a yearly annual report of press freedom and index of press freedom of each country across the world.

The annual report and the index were firstly published in 2002. While the annual report contents a brief report of condition of press in each country every year, the index of press freedom measures the level of freedom enjoyed by journalists and news organizations in the world in the same period. The index also considers the efforts made by the state to respect and ensure respect for the press freedom.

Reporters without Borders compiled a questionnaire with 50 criteria for assessing the state of press freedom in each country which was sent to its partner organizations, its 130 correspondents around the world, as well as to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists. A scale devised by the organizations was then used to give a country-score to each questionnaire. In processing data they have got, Reporters without Borders is assisted and advised by The Statistics Institute of the University of Paris.[83]

Some important features considered by the organization in deciding each country score and level are:[84] a. every kind of violation directly affecting journalists (such as murders, imprisonment, physical attacks and threats) and news media (censorship, confiscation of issues, searches and harassment), b. the degree of impunity enjoyed by those responsible for such violations, c. the legal situation affecting the news media (such as penalties for press offences, the existence of a state monopoly in certain areas and the existence of a regulatory body), d. the behavior of the authorities towards the state-owned news media and the foreign press, e. the main obstacles of the free flow of information on the Internet, f. the abuses attributable to armed militias, clandestine organizations or pressure groups that can pose a real threat to press freedom. Although the index can not be used as the indication of the quality of press in the country concerned,[85] it is a worth indication to measure the development of press freedom in the country.

In the first time the Index was published in 2002, Indonesia ranked 57th best out of 139 countries, with a score of 20.0 (the lower the score the better). This position sharply dropped to rank 110th out of 166 countries with a score of 34.25 in 2003, dropped again into number 117th out of 167 countries in 2004 (with score 37.75) and slightly improved in 2005 to equal 102nd out of 167 countries with score of 26.0.[86] In 2006, Indonesia ranked 103rd out of 168 countries with score 26.00.

In 2002, Reporters without Borders noted that media in Indonesia is still very free.[87] However, the re-creation of Department of Information and the plan to reintroduce prison sentence for “slender” in the Penal Code by President of Indonesia Megawati Soekarno Putri worried some organizations defending press freedom of the awake of state control toward press. The level of risks faced by journalists is still high, particularly in areas stricken by separatism and inter-communal violence. [88]

The level of Indonesia’ press freedom decreased from rank 57th in 2002 to 110th in 2003. The score for Indonesia’ press freedom also declined 14.25 points. It appears from Reporters without Borders annual report 2003 that the violent toward journalist in Indonesia is still high. Journalists (especially foreign journalists) were also limited by the state and army to work in conflict areas such as Aceh and Moluccas. Although it was stated that the limitation based on safety reason, it has significantly reduced the right of press to seek, acquire and disseminate information. Court officials have not showed their support to press freedom.[89] The still existence of forty articles of the Criminal Code which allow journalists to be imprisoned for their view, the passing of broadcasting law and the announcement from the parliament to give priority for secrecy law to be discussed in the parliament are saw as a possible threat for press freedom. Furthermore, the estimation from Alliance for Independent Journalists which stated that eighty percent of journalists are bribed in exchange of favorable reporting and the government officials were paid about 150 million euros for such bribes worsens the condition of press in Indonesia. [90] However, contrary to the previous fears President Megawati did not strictly control the press.

Indonesia’ score of press freedom are also decreased in 2004 for 3.50 points. In this annual report, Reporters without Borders focused their attention in several matters:[91] a. the stricter limitation toward journalists (both local and foreign journalists) to work in conflict areas such as Aceh particularly after the enactment of martial law in Aceh in 2003, b. the increasing number of defamation and insulting cases against journalists (such as: two Rakyat Merdeka editors were sentenced for insulting President Megawati and the speaker of the Lower House of the House of Representative Akbar Tanjung, Tempo case which involved a tycoon Tomy Winata who sued Tempo’s staffs and editors for defamation (the Rakyat Merdeka case and Tempo case will be discussed in more detail in the part V of this paper), c. the increasing tension in the state-press relationship (President Megawati accused that press become bias and irresponsible), d. the high number of journalists threatened, harassed, physically attacked, imprisoned, detained and murdered. However, the good news was the Alliance for Independence Press becomes more active and won their first case against the Jakarta authorities for the harassments of a journalist Edi Hariyadi. This victory also showed the good will from the court to support press freedom.

The higher score was achieved in 2005 which increased the Indonesian press freedom score for 11.75 points. There is no particular report of the condition of press freedom in Indonesia in the annual report 2005. However, in the introduction of regional report for Asia, the Reporters without Borders still concerns about the increasing limitation for the journalists in Indonesia to works in conflict area.[92]

In 2006, the score of press freedom in Indonesia remained same as in the 2005 at 26.00. The peace agreement between the government and the separatists in Aceh brought good news for journalists since they were less targeted by the army and the separatists. [93] Furthermore, the earthquake and tsunami on December 2004 opened opportunity for foreign press to works in that area. However, under the presidency Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono the penalties for press offences were strengthened and a new anti terror law gave more power to the security forces. In the review of 2006 World Press Freedom, Maureen MacNeill stated that there are 61 crucial articles potentially damaging press freedom in the draft of Indonesia Criminal Code.[94] However, the good news is the annulment of articles 134, 135, 136 of Criminal Code which stated that anyone who disseminated, demonstrated openly or put up writing or a portrait insulting president and vice-president could be jailed up to six years.

VI. Conclusion

The resignation of Suharto from his presidency in 1998 brought good news for press freedom in Indonesia. Press has been repressed in Suharto era and has been used as a tool to support government policies. Press is forced to forget its main role to provide different ideas in the society, to encourage public discourse and to criticize improper government policies. The government has a very strong control toward the press by applied the SIUPP system and censorship. Press which baldly critic the government could lost its license and banned.

The condition is different in the post Suharto era. The abolishment of SIUPP and the liquidation of Department of Information which has power to control press in 1999 are a forward step taken by the government to encourage the freedom of press. The enactment of law number 40/1999 on Press which replaced the old press law gives a more protection to press and journalist. However, unlike the prediction of neo-Tocqueffilian zero-sum theory which stated that the loosen power of the state toward civil society will be followed by the stronger position of civil society, the condition in Indonesia after the resignation of Suharto is unique. The protection of formal law toward press is not enough to strengthen its position. Yet, besides the states the freedom of press in the post Suharto era is also threaten by market (industry) and another part of civil society. Thus, the good will from all three spheres (state, market and another civil society) to support the freedom of press is important to strengthen the press as an important part of civil society. The existence of ‘civil culture’ which could be seen from tolerance toward different ideas and the decreasing number of violence experienced by journalists are also requirement for the stronger freedom of press.

Bibliography

a. Books /Articles

Abdul Razak, Role of Media in Promoting Democracy, in AMIC compilation, Media and Democracy in Asia, 2000, p. 79

Amnesty International, Indonesia: Press freedom Under Threat, http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engasa210442003, viewed at 12th June 2007

Anggara, Kejahatan Pers dalam Perspektif Hukum (Crime Related Cases in Legal Perspective), http://anggara.wordpress.com/2006/11/07/kejahatan-pers-dalam-perspektif-hukum/, viewed at 10th June 2007

Ariel Heryanto, Stanley Yoseph Adi, The Industrialization of the Media in Democratizing Indonesia, http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.unimelb.edu.au/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=105&sid=b2bf340e-1fc2-4ce9-afe5-df47f60225d3, %40sessionmgr104viewed at 13th January 2007

Arief Budiman (ed), State and Civil Society in Indonesia, 1990

Arief Budiman, Barbara Hatley, Damien Kingsbury, Reformasi crisis and Change in Indonesia, 1995

Article 19, Note on The Indonesian Press Law, http://www.article19.org/pdfs/analysis/indonesia-press-law-feb-2004.pdf, viewed at 10th June 2007

Atmakususmah, A.K.A. (ed), Mochtar Lubis: Wartawan Jihad ( Mochtar Lubis: Fighting Journalist), 1992

David T. Hill, The Press in New Order Indonesia, 1994

Dedy N. Hidayat, Mass Media: Between the Palace and the Market, in Richard W. Baker, et all (ed), Indonesia: The Challenge of Change, 1999

Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, Annual Report 200-2001: Euforia, Konsentrasi Modal dan Tekanan Massa, 2001

Erfried Adam, Media and Democracy in Asia, in Media and Democracy in Asia (an AMIC Compilation), 2000

Garry Rodan, Civil Society and Other Political Possibilities in Southeast Asia, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 1997, 27, 2; ProQuest Asian Bussiness and Reference, p. 156.

Herbert J. Gans, Democracy and The News, 2003.

John Keane, The Media and Democracy, 2004

Jones Howard Palfrey, Indonesia: the Possible Dream, 1971

Jose Manuel Tesoro, Indonesia: Learning the Ropes of Press Freedom, The Unesco Couries, February 2000, http://www.unesco.org/courier/2000.02/uk/pdf/00.02.43.pdf, viewed at 24th Mei 2006

Judith Lichtenberg, Democracy and The Mass Media, 1990

Indonesia: A Briefing for members of the Consultative Group on Indonesia, http://web.amnesty.org/library/pdf/ASA210422003ENGLISH/$File/ASA2104203.pdf, viewed at 15th June 2007

Indonesian Court Acquits Playboy Indonesia Chief Editor, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2007_April_9/ai_n18792850, viewed at 15th June 2007

Indonesia: Survey Questions and Responses, http://www.fafo.no/liabilities/CCCSurveyIndonesia06Sep2006.pdf, viewed at 15th June 2007

International Press Institute, World Press Freedom Review 2006, http://www.Freemedia.at/cms/ipi/freedom_detail.html?country=/KW001/KW005/k, viewed at 12th June 2007

John Keane, The Media and Democracy, 2000.

Lee Hock Guan, Introduction Civil Society in Southeast Asia, in Civil Society in Southeast Asia, Lee Hock Guan (eds), 2004

Maureen MacNeill, World Press Freedom Review: Indonesia, http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/freedom_detail.html?country=/KW0001/KW0005, viewed at 12th June 2007.

M. Alwi Dahlan, Country Report: The Indonesian Experience in an AMIC Compilation, Media and Democracy in Asia, 2000

Michael Edwards, Civil Society, 2004

Michael Van Langenberg, The New Order State: Language, Ideology, Hegemony in Arief Budiman, State and Civil Society in Indonesia

Michael Walzer, The Concept of Civil Society, in Michael Walzer, Toward a Global Civil Society, 1995

Mikaela Nyman, Democratising Indonesia, 2006

P. Bambang Wisudo, "Bulan Madu Pers Telah Berakhir" (The Honeymoon Period is Finish), Kompas, 9 February 2000.

Playboy Indonesia “not pornography”, Al Jazeera.net, http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/05923A43-65BC-42FC-8113-684A428C4FDF.htm, viewed at 15th June 2007

Reporters without Borders for press freedom, http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=280, viewed at 15th June 2007

Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Indonesia Annual Report 2002, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=1464, viewed at 10th June 2007

Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Indonesia Annual Report 2003, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=6469, viewed at 10th June 2007

Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Indonesia Annual Report 2004, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=10172, viewed at 10th June 2007

Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Introduction Asia - Annual Report 2005, http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=512, viewed at 10th June 2007

Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, 2006 Annual report Asia-Indonesia, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=17353, viewed at 10th June 2007

Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2006: How the index was compiled, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=19391, viewed 12th June 2007

Reporters Without Borders, Indonesia-Annual Report 2007, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=20786, viewed at 20th Mei 2007

Richard W. Baker (ed), Indonesia The Challengen of Change, 1999

Rob Jenkins, Mistaking ‘governance’ for ‘politics’: foreign aid, democracy, and the construction of civil society, in Civil Society: History and Possibilities, S. Kaviraj and S. Khilnani (eds) (2001)

Shigeru Takatori, Mass Media in the Post New Order Era Indonesia, 2001

Sujatmiko, Iwan Gardono, Wacana Civil Society di Indonesia ( a discourse of civil society in Indonesia), 2003

S. Satya Dharma, et all, Malpraktek Press Indonesia (Indonesian’ Press Malpractice), 2003

The IMF and Civil Society Organizations, International Monetary Fund, http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/ciuv.htm, viewed at 27th September 2005

Toeti Kakialatu, Media in Indonesia: Forum for Political Change and Critical Assesment, Asia Pasific Viewpoint, Vol.48, No. 1, April 2007

Tread’s and Associate, Mengapa Somasi : Kasus Hukum Tomy Winata vs Tempo ( Why should somasi: Tomy Winata against Tempo),2003

Ulasan Singkat Sensus Penduduk Tahun 2000 (a brief description of population census in 2000), http://www.bps.go.id/sector/population/Pop_indo.htm, viewed at 15th June 2007

UN Human Rights Committee General Comment 25, issued 12 July 1196, cited in article 19, Note on the Indonesian Press Law, 2004, http://www.article19.org/pdfs/analysis/indonesia-press-law-feb-2004.pdf, viewed at 13th June 2007

Verena Beitengger-Lee, Civil Society in Indonesia – Concept and Realities, in Inggrid Wessel (ed), Democratisation in Indonesia after the Fall of Suharto, 2005

Warief djajanto, The New Indonesian Press Law, http://www.seapabkk.org/coloumn/indonesia/2102000.html, viewed at 12th June 2007

Wina Armada, Mengugat Kebebasan Press (Questioning Press Freedom), 1993,

2. Legislations/Regulations

UN General Assembly Resolution 217A (III)

International Covenant on Civil and Political Right (ICCPR)

The 1945 Constitution of Indonesia

Law Number 11/1966 on Press

Law Number 21/1982 on Press

TAP MPR RI XVII/MPR/1998(the decision of House of Representative of Indonesia Number XVII/MPR/1998) on Human Right

Law Number 39/1999 on Human Right Law Number 39/1999 on Human Right

Law Number 40/ 1999 on Press

Law Number 12/2005 on Ratification of International Civil and Political Rights

Indonesia’ Criminal Code

Decision of the Minister of Information Number 214A/KEP/MEN/PEN/1984 on Procedure and Condition for obtaining a SIUPP

Department of Information Ministerial Decree Number 02/PER/MENPEN/1969



[1] Dosen Hukum Administrasi Negara Fakultas Hukum UGM

[2] Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, Annual Report 200-2001: Euforia, Konsentrasi Modal dan Tekanan Massa, 2001, p. 15.

[3] Reporters Without Borders, http://www.rsf.org, seen at 23rd Mei 2007.

[4] Michael Walzer, The Concept of Civil Society, in Michael Walzer, Toward a Global Civil Society, 1995. He stated that “[o]nly a democratic state can create a democratic civil society; only a democratic civil society can sustain a democratic state”.

[5]See: Michael Edwards, Civil Society, 2004, p. 2; Garry Rodan, Civil Society and Other Political Possibilities in Southeast Asia, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 1997, 27, 2; ProQuest Asian Bussiness and Reference pg. 156.

[6] See: Garry Rodan,, ibid; ProQuest Asian Bussiness and Reference pg. 156. He describes how the authoritarian government in Asia perceives the idea of civil society as western idea and threat Asian Values. Rob Jenkins, Mistaking ‘governance’ for ‘politics’: foreign aid, democracy, and the construction of civil society, in Civil Society: History and Possibilities, S. Kaviraj and S. Khilnani (eds) (2001). He illustrates how different circumstances gives different meaning of civil society and these meanings usually changes over time influenced by unpredictable causes. This gives justification for The United Nations Development Program to adopt the Lockean definition of civil society and not the Gramscian’ definition since the Lockean’ definition could work better in Chinese political discourse. The IMF and Civil Society Organizations, International Monetary Fund, http:// www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/ciuv.htm, viewed at 27th September 2005. Different with mostly scholars that included media as an important part of civil society, IMF excluded the media from its definition of civil society organization.

[7] Neera Chandhoke said that the wide range of the meaning of civil society has “flattened out to such an alarming extent that it loses its credibility”. The similar comment has been given by Kaviraj and Khilnani who saw the popularity of the concept contribute to “a problem of indeterminacy”.

[8] See: Michael Edwards, above n. 2.

[9] In this paper, I limited the definition of press as periodicals including newspapers, magazines, tabloid and bulletin.

[10] Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, Annual Report 200-2001: Euforia, Konsentrasi Modal dan Tekanan Massa, 2001, p. 15.

[11] Reporters Without Borders, http://www.rsf.org, seen at 23rd Mei 2007.

[12] Lee Hock Guan, Introduction Civil Society in Southeast Asia, in Civil Society in Southeast Asia, Lee Hock Guan (eds), 2004, p. 1.

[13] Ibid p. 2.

[14] Ibid p. 2-10.

[15] Ibid p. 7.

[16] Michael Edwards, above n 2.

[17] Erfried Adam, Media and Democracy in Asia, in Media and Democracy in Asia (an AMIC Compilation), 2000, p. 1.

[18] UN General Assembly Resolution 217A (III).

[19] UN Human Rights Committee General Comment 25, issued 12 July 1196, cited in article 19, Note on the Indonesian Press Law, 2004, http://www.article19.org/pdfs/analysis/indonesia-press-law-feb-2004.pdf, viewed at 13th June 2007.

[20] Article 19 (3) International Covenant on Civil and Political Right (ICCPR).

[21] Atmakususmah, A.K.A. (ed), Mochtar Lubis: Wartawan Jihad ( Mochtar Lubis: Fighting Journalist), 1992, p 22-23.

[22] Anggara, Kejahatan Pers dalam Perspektif Hukum (Crime Related Cases in Legal Perspective), http://anggara.wordpress.com/2006/11/07/kejahatan-pers-dalam-perspektif-hukum/, viewed at 10th June 2007.

[23] It was De Express in Surakarta, Sinar Deli in Medan, and Oetosan Hindia in Surabaya.

[24] David T. Hill, The Press in New Order Indonesia, 1994. The one example of article that criticize the colonial is an article wrote by Tjipto Mangunkusumo in De Locomotief in Yogyakarta which criticize the appointment of a Regent (a district head) on the sole basis of inherited right. He argued that the appointment should base on capability and merit. However, the colonial found that this article is subversive.

[25] It was Abadi, Merdeka, Indonesia Raya, Pedoman, Duta Masyarakat, Suluh Indonesia and Harian Rakyat.

[26] Toeti Kakialatu, Media in Indonesia: Forum for Political Change and Critical Assesment, Asia Pasific Viewpoint, Vol.48, No. 1, April 2007, p. 62.

[27] Jones Howard Palfrey, Indonesia: the Possible Dream, 1971, p. 236. Sukarno stated: “Ah, they are not communists. Indonesians are good Moslems”.

[28] Article 28 of the 1945 Constituttion of Indonesia.

[29] Toeti Kakialatu, above n 16, p. 63. During 1963-1967, 163 newspapers across the country are banned.

[30] Chapter 2 article 4 stated: “No censorship and or bridling shall be applied to the national press”. Chapter 2 article 5.1: “Freedom of the press is guaranteed in accordance with the fundamental rights of citizens”. Chapter 4 article 8.2 : No publication permit is needed.

[31] More complete amendment of radical lexicon see article 1 Law Number 21/1982 on Press.

[32] Press Council is an institution which consists of representatives from press organization and the society including press experts. The role of Press Council is to assist the government in supervising the development and the growth of national press, thus positive interaction between the government, press and society could be developed.

[33] Article 1b Law Number 21/1982 on Press.

[34] David T. Hill, above n 29, 1994, p. 48. See also: Decision of the Minister of Information Number 214A/KEP/MEN/PEN/1984 on Procedure and Condition for obtaining a SIUPP.

[35] Michael Van Langenberg, The New Order State: Language, Ideology, Hegemony in Arief Budiman, State and Civil Society in Indonesia, p. 130.

[36] Ibid. During 1966-1967 court is utilized to display trial seditious intent from communists. During 1987-1990, a lot of seditious cases was brought to santri dissenters.

[37] Department of Information Ministerial Decree Number 02/PER/MENPEN/1969.

[38] Should the press responsible to the state? Or should the press responsible to the reader? Which reader are they responsible for?

[39] Toeti Kakialatu, above n 31, p. 63.

[40] David T. Hill, above n 29, p. 45. The mechanism of telephone culture is the authorities called the editors of the press appealing certain article not to be published. If the periodical still published such article, written warning from authorities will be sent. Finally, an ignorance of written warning could cause a revocation of the press’ lisence.

[41] The number of publications was 283 in 1975, dropped to 256 in 1986 and slightly increased in 1991 to 270. See:Ibid, p. 53.

[42] The total number of permit issued in April 1991 was 264.

[43] Ibid, p. 35.

[44]Ibid, p. 54.

[45] In the nine months of his presidency, Habibie managed to accomplish four important reforms: freeing the press from censorship and control, allowing political freedom in establishing new parties, conducting general election and allowing referendum toward East Timor problem. See: Toeti Kakialatu, above n 31, p.66.

[46] Jose Manuel Tesoro, Indonesia: Learning the Ropes of Press Freedom, The Unesco Couries, February 2000, http://www.unesco.org/courier/2000.02/uk/pdf/00.02.43.pdf, viewed at 24th Mei 2006.

[47] Article 2 Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[48] Article 4 (1) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[49] Article 5 (2) Law Number 11/1966 on Press.

[50] Article 4 (2) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[51] Article 4 (3) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[52] Article 18 (1) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[53] Article 7 (1) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[54] Article 8 Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[55] Article 9 (1) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[56] Article 5 (1) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[57] Article 5 (2) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[58] Article 5(3) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[59] Article 18 (2) Law Number 40/1999 on Press.

[60] Article 19, Note on The Indonesian Press Law, http://www.article19.org/pdfs/analysis/indonesia-press-law-feb-2004.pdf, viewed at 10th June 2007.

[61]Ibid.

[62] Public still believed that Habibie is part of the old regime under Suharto. He also was blamed for the separation of East Timor from Indonesia. As the climax, The House of Representative rejected his justification speech in the end of his presidency. See: Toeti Kakialatu, above n 31, p.66.

[63] Tread’s and Associate, Mengapa Somasi : Kasus Hukum Tomy Winata vs Tempo ( Why should somasi: Tomy Winata against Tempo),2003, p. vii.

[64] For example: Brunei Gate and Bulog Gate scandals. Brunai Gate is a scandal which Gus dur is accused receiving funds from Sultan of Brunei to be used for undefined social programmes. Bulog gate is a scandal of misused of funds from State Logistic Agency (bulog). See: Toeti Kakialatu, above n 31, p. 67.

[65]Ibid.

[66] International Press Institute, World Press Freedom Review 2006, http://www.Freemedia.at/cms/ipi/freedom_detail.html?country=/KW001/KW005/k, viewed at 12th June 2007.

[67] Jose Manuel Tesoro, above n 52.

[68] This number is an estimation which was counted from the number of SIUPP issued by the government before the reformation era (289 SIUPP) and the number of SIUPP issued by the government after the reformation era, in the first year before SIUPP system is abolished (1.398 SIUPP). So the total is 1687. However, since the SIUPP system is abolished, there is no exact data about the number press publishers in Indonesia. See: Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, above n 8, p. 15.

[69] David T. Hill, above n 29, p. 47.

[70] Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, above n 8, p. 34.

[71]Ibid.

[72] It was stated by W. McChesney in Rich Media Poor Democracy cited by See: Ibid, p. 13. See also: M. Alwi Dahlan, Country Report: The Indonesian Experience in an AMIC Compilation, Media and Democracy in Asia, 2000, p. 72-3.

[73] Ulasan Singkat Sensus Penduduk Tahun 2000 (a brief description of population census in 2000), http://www.bps.go.id/sector/population/Pop_indo.htm, viewed at 15th June 2007.

[74] The estimated sales figures of some newspapers in Indonesia in 1991 were: Kompas ± 522,875; Pos Kota ± 500,000; Jawa Post ± 350,000; Suara Pembaharuan ± 338,802; Media Indonesia ± 302,000; Pikiran Rakyat ± 180,600; Kedaulatan Rakyat ± 105,000; Surya ± 127,983; Suara Merdeka ± 170,700. The total is 2,597,960. This number is only 1% of Indonesian population. See: Department of Information 1991/1992 cited by Dedy N. Hidayat, Mass Media: Between the Palace and the Market, in Richard W. Baker, et all (ed), Indonesia: The Challenge of Change, 1999, p. 195

[75] From 10 of the biggest advertising agencies in the world, five established branch in Indonesia. See:Ibid, p. 181.

[76] Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, above n 8, p. 16.

[77] P. Bambang Wisudo, "Bulan Madu Pers Telah Berakhir" (The Honeymoon Period is Finish), Kompas, 9 February 2000.

[78] Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, above n 8, p. 15. See also: Reporters Without Borders, Indonesia-Annual Report 2007, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=20786, viewed at 20th Mei 2007.

[79] Ariel Heryanto, Stanley Yoseph Adi, The Industrialization of the Media in Democratizing Indonesia, http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.unimelb.edu.au/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=105&sid=b2bf340e-1fc2-4ce9-afe5-df47f60225d3, %40sessionmgr104viewed at 13th January 2007.

[80] Eddy Suprapto, Ign. Haryanto, Heru Hendratmoko, above n.8, p. 33-35.

[81] Reporters without Borders for press freedom, http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=280, viewed at 15th June 2007.

[82]Ibid.

[83] Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2006: How the index was compiled, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=19391, viewed 12th June 2007.

[84]Ibid.

[85]Ibid.

[86] Reporters Without Borders, above n. 9.

[87] Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Indonesia Annual Report 2002, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=1464, viewed at 10th June 2007.

[88] Some incident threaten press freedom in Indonesia in 2001particularly those threatening journalists were: more than thirty three journalists are attacked, three journalists are killed, six journalists were kidnapped, six journalists threaten and four journalists arrested.

[89] Prosecutor for Sander Thoenes, a Dutch journalist who murdered in East Timor in 1999, in Jakarta stopped the investigation for this case against the suspect Dos Santos, an Indonesian army from 745th battalion, based on the lack of evidence. The prosecutor stated that the key witness found by Dutch police is unreliable since he always changes his testimony and the evidence given by Dutch Police is contradict with those of Indonesian police.

[90] Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Indonesia Annual Report 2003, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=6469, viewed at 10th June 2007.

[91] Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Indonesia Annual Report 2004, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=10172, viewed at 10th June 2007.

[92] Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, Introduction Asia - Annual Report 2005, http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=512, viewed at 10th June 2007.

[93] Reporters without Borders for Press Freedom, 2006 Annual report Asia-Indonesia, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=17353, viewed at 10th June 2007.

[94] Maureen MacNeill, World Press Freedom Review: Indonesia, http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/freedom_detail.html?country=/KW0001/KW0005, viewed at 12th June 2007.

Tidak ada komentar: