Court acquits 'Time'

The court's decision defends the public's right to information, the media's independence and the ongoing anti-graft drive, writes 'The Jakarta Post'

The Jakarta Post
Thursday, April 23, 2009

It was a long battle with a happy ending because the interests of the public have been served. The Supreme Court overturned its 2007 ruling last week and cleared Time magazine of all charges in a defamation case involving the family of the late former president Soeharto.

It all began with the article "Soeharto Inc." which Time magazine ran in its May 14, 1999 edition. The story, published a year after the autocrat had fallen from grace, was about how Soeharto had built up his family businesses.

This was followed by the magazine's Asian edition of May 17, 1999, that reported a transfer of US$9 billion from Switzerland to Austria, of funds allegedly belonging to Soeharto.

This was the report that apparently earned Soeharto's ire, and he subsequently decided to sue the magazine. The last report, in the Time Asia May 24, 1999 edition, estimated Soeharto's wealth to be US$15 billion.

The battlefield was set, and there were some worrying moments in the ensuing years when justice seemed to hover somewhere on the horizon.

The Supreme Court had shot itself in the foot once in August 2007, when it overturned rulings of district and high courts, both of which had dismissed Soeharto's lawsuit. The court had then ordered the magazine pay $106 million in damages to Soeharto's estate.

But Supreme Court Justice Hatta Ali said last Thursday that the article in question "did not violate the law" or breach ethical standards.

The court deserves high marks for defending the public's right to information, for encouraging the media's independent working environment and for supporting the ongoing anti-graft drive.

An opposite decision would have discouraged the media to report on graft cases, particularly when it involves those in high places.

We support the statement made by Time lawyer Todung Mulya Lubis, when he said that, "The decade-long struggle by Time to convince the country's legal institutions has succeeded in proving that news for public interest should not be categorized as a crime."

Much of the problem in trying cases related to the media stems from judges' preference of using the Criminal Law instead of the relatively new Press Law.

With this decision, the Supreme Court has collected at least two distinctions under its belts as far as the press is concerned. The other is the celebrated 2006 ruling for Tempo magazine.

Both decisions augur well with the nation's journey toward political change and democracy that began in 1998.

This high profile case has no doubt left a lingering questions as to whether Soeharto embezzled public money. This is a regrettable fact indeed. The more so because the same man had also done so many good things for Indonesia.

Yet, this cannot be used as an excuse. For those who hold public office, no single action should be allowed to elude public scrutiny.

Accountability beckons that this case be unveiled, sooner or later. Otherwise it will become another dark number, of which we regretfully have aplenty already.

Date Posted: 4/23/2009