Year of X-asperation:
Yearend Notes on Indonesian Press Condition 2001

February 22, 2002
Source: ALERT Magazine Dec 2001 - Jan 2002

In Brief

The Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) records 95 attacks on the press in Indonesia for the year 2001. Quantitatively, it is less than the number in 2000, where 115 violence cases against journalists were recorded. However we lost one colleague in 2001. Poso Post journalist I Wayan Sumariasana was found dead in Poso, Central Sulawesi. The murder motive is still puzzling, while the authority seems to have no interest in unravelling the case.

The year 2001 also saw the forced closure of Aceh’s biggest daily Serambi Indonesia. Twice the paper had to stop publication due to threats and intimidation from the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) officials.

Out of the 95 cases, police brought only one to trial. The lack of justice system, especially for press offenders, made attacking the press as an excusable conduct. Furthermore, like in years before, police - the public defender - acted more as champion among press attackers.

Indonesian press is now in the fourth year of the press freedom era. But journalists are still in fear of violence and threats in their line of duty.

Unfortunately, the society often takes its frustration from various social-economic crisis for the past three years to the press, tagging it as the scapegoat, a consequences the press must face in the supposedly free era.

Lukas Luwarso

Country Director

Aceh Update: PWI Bombed

Jakarta and Lhokseumawe are very different places. In Jakarta, it is now the rain season, but in Lhokseumawe, it is the bombing season. For weeks North Aceh has been ravaged by bombings each night. On January 10 2002 the office of the Indonesian Press Association (PWI) became a target of these bombings.

At around 11.30pm, the PWI North Aceh Secretariat was terrorised by a homemade bomb. While there were no fatalities, the explosion caused extensive damage to the office.

According to the Chairman of North Aceh PWI, Zainal Bakri, the bomb was left under the window of the his office. Journalists often used that office.

“We deplore the explosion at the journalists offices,” said Bakri.

“If there was a report which was not liked, please use the measures that are already in place to express that concern.”

Bakri said he was surprised by the bombing, believed to be a result of conflict between Aceh’s rival groups, the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) and the armed forces (TNI).

“Although these groups are at odds, they were in agreement about making the journalists offices a target of the bombing terror,” said Bakri.

Until now, the bombers identity and motives remain unknown. The spokesman for GAM, Sofyan Daud, contends that GAM was not involved in the bombing of the PWI office in North Aceh. He accuses TNI of the bombing, believing it was aimed at discrediting GAM. On the other hand, TNI Lieutenant Commander Zaenal Muttaqin believes that GAM was responsible for the bombing.

The bombing of shattered four windows on the south side of the building. It also caused a major crack in the ceiling measuring about six meters and the leakage of a drain.

Being a journalist in Aceh is not easy. Rival groups always want the media to tell their side of the story. In Aceh GAM, the police and TNI all place pressure on journalists and the press. In 2001 GAM twice undertook action to close down Serambi Indonesia, the largest newspaper in Aceh, because they were dissatisfied with its reports. According to one North Aceh journalist who does not want to be named, he has been the victim of threats in the past.

“In North Aceh it is not rare for a journalist to be threatened with being shot if covering an incident where the newspaper appears to side with TNI,” he stated.

Muhammad AH and RCTI cameraman, M Ali Raban have experienced this sort of threatening behaviour. On February 7 2001, they became the victims of such threats whilst covering a shooting incident involving the North Aceh policeman Brigadier Johannes Pasaribu. The officer threatened them, pointing his loaded gun at them.

The identity of those who perpetrate acts of violence against journalists is not always known. Two years ago, Mustafa Ismail, a writer for Tempo magazine was beaten up while covering the Kandang riots in North Aceh. He was then expelled from the village of Meunasah Blang. A radio journalist working for Nikoya was also beaten viciously in the streets Aceh’s capital.

Supriyadi, a journalist for the Medan Pos, met the most tragic fate. He was on an assignment in Lhoksukon, North Aceh, when he was abducted in front of his wife, Poniyem. The father of two was later found shot dead; his neck was also broken. His fate was similar to that of Panji Demokrasi journalist Mukmin Fanani. Two years earlier four men riding Honda GL Pro motorbikes shot him dead in Akue Awee, Blang Mangat, North Aceh.

After that incident, several media offices received silent telephone calls. Some offices also received phone calls where journalists could only hear a gun being cocked.

Yearend Notes 2001: Different Year, Same Attackers

The situation facing the press throughout 2001 was dismal. Indeed, journalists can now write about anything without excessive fears of banning or physical attack. The publication license, which once threatened the end of any media critical of the government, no longer exists.

We now have Press Law no. 40/1999 which prohibits censorship and press bans, and even threatens any parties who stand in the way of press freedom with a maximum of two years imprisonment and a fine of Rp500 million.

But this year has witnessed various problems that could threaten that newly discovered press freedom.

Violence

One ever present threat facing journalists is violence. Whilst media content is often deemed offensive, in the absence of legal enforcement, offended parties tend to ignore the right of response, the right to take the press to court or the right to demand corrections. Such parties prefer to take short cuts when settling their problems with the press by assaulting media offices, beating or even kidnapping reporters. Data from the Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) shows that throughout 2001 no less than 95 cases of pressure and violence against journalists were reported.

These frequent acts of violence against journalists and the mass media are deeply saddening. The daily Serambi Indonesia twice this year did not publish, due to dissatisfaction on behalf of GAM with its coverage. In the first instance Serambi withdrew its publication for one day on June 20. In August, publication was again withdrawn for more than 10 days.

One Indonesian journalist was killed this year. On June 3, a body was found floating along the Poso River in Tanah Runtuh, Gebang Rejo sub district in Poso Kota, Central Sulawesi. Two stones weighing 70 kilograms had been tied to the corpse's swollen neck with a sign reading "Bone sugar factory." The victim’s head clean shaven and his face beyond recognition due to severe wounds; his nose was broken and his left eye missing. Stab wounds were found all over his body, a man later identified as I Wayan Sumariasana of the Poso Post daily. The motive for the murder remains unclear.

Of the 95 cases mentioned above, less than 5% of the available suspects were brought to trial. An absence of law enforcement procedures for protecting journalists can lead to the perception that violence against press workers is legally permissible. SEAPA records that police officers are the second most frequent perpetrator of pressure and violence against journalists. Apart from beating journalists, police frequently summon journalists as witnesses. On its seventh anniversary the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) therefore ranked GAM and the police amongst the most sensible enemies of press freedom in Indonesia.

The threat of violence has caused anxiety in the media industry and has led some to impose self-censorship. Some media avoid writing reporting potentially offensive material about certain groups. Media executives admit to engage in such self-censorship. An editor from the Jawa Pos group said in May this year that following the occupation of Jawa Pos headquarters in Surabaya, East Java on May 6 2000, the daily was later very careful when reporting on former President Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid, and his organization, the Nahdlatul Ulama. Thus, they imposed self-censorship to avoid the wrath of the NU and Gus Dur supporters. Jawa Pos, he said, had even manipulated photographs of an anti-Gus Dur rally staged by students, so that the images would not offend his supporters.

Such self-censorship leads to silences in the press, an institution that is supposed to function as watchdog. Historically, the absence of such controls has led to arbitrary national leadership. Self-censorship effectively denies the public the right to accurate information, and this leads to a lack of equilibrium in the public’s participation in the political process.

State Threats

Threats from the state cannot be taken light-heartedly, even in these times of apparent freedom. Signs of imminent government intervention emerged with the set-up of a State Ministry for Information and Communication in August 2001. Whilst information should be the business of society by establishing this ministry, the state seems determined to make it its business once again. Furthermore, the Megawati government also plans to ratify a draft law of a criminal code that had 37 clauses with the potential of cutting press freedoms. If passed, the new law would have at least 40 clauses, more chances for the state to send journalists to jail.

Moves to control the press were also evident from the cooperation between Minister of Information Syamsul Muarif with the legislature, especially when he attempted to include clauses in the Criminal Code by which elements of the press could be put on trial. This was disclosed following a working meeting between legislators of Commission I of the House of Representative (DPR) and the minister on December 7.

A draft law on broadcasting formulated by the House of Representatives (DPR) was submitted to the government on February 20, raising concern amongst the broadcasting society, many of whom feared potential threats to their newly found freedoms. For instance, from the 63 clauses, 21 outline fines and punishments for broadcasting institutions deemed to have violated the law.

So far, such Regulations and draft laws threatening press freedoms have rarely been used. But experience with former governments shows that the press freedom only exists during "honeymoon periods" between the media and new governments. Soekarno's presidency during the parliamentary period of the 1950s was highly accommodative of the press. After the regime's power was consolidated in September 1957, Soekarno and the military rulers banned 10 dailies. In February 1965, 21 dailies in Jakarta and Medan were banned. A month later eight publications in various cities were also banned.

Similarly the New Order banned 12 publications at the end of the honeymoon period taking repressive measures after the January riots of 1974. Four years later the New Order banned seven dailies and seven campus media. In June 1994 the government banned the Tempo and Editor magazines and the Detik news tabloid. History shows that the government is never truly in favour of press freedom.

Lack of Welfare

The matter of journalists’ welfare continues to be a great concern for press organisations. A survey conducted by AJI in four major cities (Jakarta, Surabaya, Medan and Makassar) between 1999 to 2001 reveals that wages of journalists were relatively low compared to living expenses. In Jakarta, most reporters take home less than Rp1 million (US$100) a month, and even 2.5% of journalists claimed a wage of under Rp250,000. In East Java, most reporters (86.2%) said they received wages of less than Rp1 million, or mostly between Rp250,000 to Rp500,000; while 15.2% of journalists surveyed in East Java said they were paid less than Rp100,000 monthly.

In Medan, AJI found that 28% of journalists received wages of Rp200,000 to Rp400,000 while 26% received less than Rp200,000. In Makassar, most journalists received less than Rp400,000 a month. More than 30% of reporters were still paid under Rp200,000 while more than 40% received Rp200,000 to Rp400,000.

Envelope Journalism

Such low wages often provides some justification for bribes or "envelopes", and this clearly hampers a journalist's integrity and independence. "How can we edit our stories if we're hungry?" one journalist said. Such practises are clearly unacceptable, though it is similar to the behaviour of many civil servants who say they impose levies because of their small salaries.

It is hard to uphold journalistic ethics of which issues of welfare and solidarity are not tackled. Media managements gain directly from prioritising the welfare of their workers, as this constitutes an effort of business sustainability.

The state and a wide range of corporations directly responsible for the "envelope culture." The issue of bribes goes two ways. One survey disclosed that each year no less than Rp864 billion was distributed to 64 state-owned companies for journalists' envelope. Journalists would receive such money simply because of their profession, one in which he has the power to influence public opinion. Those parties supplying such money only have one purpose in mind - favourable coverage. This is why envelopes can be considered nothing less than a common bribe.

The late former Attorney General Ali Said once told a press conference:

“Whereas Napoleon was more scared of one journalist than one battalion, I fear 10 soldiers more than 100 journalists, from whom I can protect myself with 100 envelopes."

The abundance of "benevolent" parties towards journalists has led to criminal acts. The phenomenon of fake journalists – often dubbed as "bodrex journalists" - remained a feature of the press in 2001. Blackmailing is also on the increase.

On June 26 in Surabaya, East Java, two companies from the Maspion Group held a shareholders’ meeting at a certain hotel. They intended to conduct a public expose and a press conference which was cancelled following intimidation from fake journalists. The bodrex journalists enlisted 75 names to receive "envelopes" and stated that the companies had offended them for failing to put their names in the invitation list. They accused Maspion of belittling the press and of violating the Press Laws. They demanded written apologies printed in the media and filed a police report against Maspion two days following the incident.

Such practises are criminal and disturbing both for the direct victims and to those in the press industry itself as they further damage the credibility of the press. The image of journalists has been corrupted, one of blackmailing, extortion and fraud.

Folding Papers

This year has seen the fall of many a publication in the wake of steady business declines. Several national publications have closed including the news tabloids Detak and Tekad, and the Tajuk news magazine. The threat of closure is also imminent for the Forum Keadilan news magazine.

Information obtained by SEAPA shows that out of the 1,398 media recorded by the publication permits (SIUPP) following the fall of Soeharto, only 487 survived. However only 15% of those media still publishing can be considered in business, whilst 75% are less fortunate and have not been able to pay their employees well.

The cause of the collapsing business - mainly in print media - can be traced to three main reasons. First, many emerged merely because they were carried away in the euphoria of press freedoms and were not managed professionally. Second, a saturated market led to tight media competition. Third, a lack of investor funds in the form of minor capital investment or from lack of capital accumulation these products could not sell.

Other problems quickly followed the closure of such media publications - layoffs in unfavourable conditions. The Panasea magazine sacked 19 employees, ignoring their rights. Forum Keadilan magazine told 26 workers that they were temporarily out of work. The Pos Kita daily in Solo also fired 15 employees without due attention to their rights.

Gone Too Far

The many complaints and criticisms of the media industry in this era of press freedom has led many to conclude that the press has outstretched itself. Many new media, new journalists and tight competition has led to an increase in provocative and sensational news, most evident in those media touching on matters of politics and sex. "Satan America!" screamed one headline of a national daily on October 9. On the same page another heading read "Bush and Blair to the gallows." Media thriving on politics often use such language whilst those specializing in sex-related coverage are also swarming the market, exploiting images of women. These include the tabloids Wow, Pop, SeXXY, BliTZ, LiPSTICK and BOS.

All journalists' organisations, media companies and the Press Council are responsible for upholding the code of ethics. Not only does this ensure more dignified press freedoms, it also serves to silence those parties critical to press freedom and intend to regain monopolistic control of the press. Fortunately, the Press Council has acted as an 'ethics police', ready to apply moral sanctions upon any media violating the journalists’ code of ethics.

Press freedom has good and bad consequences, a lack of such commonly bring disaster. The press can go too far at times, but a state without press freedom is a state that has gone too far, and this is the ultimate disaster.