ENGLISH
| Wednesday, 22 May 2013 |
INDONESIA
Wednesday, 22 May 2013 | 02:39
With a daily production volume averaging at 86 million tons on normal days,
Freeports's ceased operations may cost the state US$1.82 million a day.
Wednesday, 22 May 2013 | 02:22
The Energy Ministry announced that all victims of the Freeport mine collapse have
been found. Twenty one workers died while 10 others suffer injuries.
Tuesday, 03 July, 2012 | 15:46 WIB
Nothing Cool About Smoking in Malls
TEMPO Interactive, Jakarta:A citizens group advocating the Jakarta smoking ban has brought a suit against the ITC Cempaka Mas shopping mall, because shoppers have been allowed to violate the ban within the mall’s premises. The lawsuit was filed by the Jakarta Residents Forum, or Fakta, and it is currently hearing witnesses at the ongoing trial held at the Central Jakarta District Court. The lawsuit itself was filed in May of last year and accuses ITC Cempaka Mas mall of blatantly ignoring the 2010 city administration regulation, which bans smoking in public places. Subagyo, a 45-year old resident of Cipinang Muara in East Jakarta, still remembers the “small” incident which occurred to him and his family at the Cempaka Mas shopping mall in mid-2011. Subagyo and his wife and children were shopping at this mall. His family had been queuing outside a fast-food counter. A man smoking in line behind Subagyo's wife was angered when she asked him to respect the ban on smoking. He refused to do so. “Neither mall security nor attendants at the food counter intervened in behalf of my wife,” said Subagyo. Subagyo told what happened to the family at a weekly meeting of the Jakarta Residents Forum at Cipinang Muara. Not only Subagyo, but also many others at the meeting told of similar experiences, confirming the results of a survey conducted by Fakta in 2008 on widespread violations of the smoking ban. More than 50 percent of shopping malls in Jakarta, including Cempaka Mas, were found to have ignored the ban. “They let shoppers freely smoke on their premises,” said Tubagus Haryo Karbyanto, a lawyer and active member of Fakta. On Aug. 11, Fakta sent a letter of complaint to Cempaka Mas and again on Sept. 16 of the same year, on what happed to Subagyo. “No responses were given to both letters,” said Tubagus. On October 2011 Fakta filed a lawsuit at the Central Jakarta District Court against three parties: Cempaka Mas, Duta Pertiwi, owner of the shopping mall, and the city’s Environmental Management Agency (BPLHD). Tubagus said the lawsuit was the first of its kind against operator and owner of a shopping mall in Jakarta. Similar lawsuits have only been previously filed against local administrations for failing to enforce the regulations on smoking ban. According to Tubagus, Fakta extensively quoted provisions from international conventions, laws and regulations on health and tobacco control in the preparation of the lawsuit. He said Fakta also used the services of 18 lawyers, members of the Indonesian Solidarity for Tobacco Control, to fight for its case in court. “If the present lawsuit prevails, we will follow it up with a lawsuit simultaneously against shopping malls in the five mayoralties of Jakarta,” said Tubagus. Fakta is not looking for any compensation, demanding only that that the court declare the defendants had breached the law and apologize openly to the public. In particular, Fakta demanded that Cempaka Mas comply with the 2010 city administration Regulation No. 88, on Areas Restricted to Smoking by putting up more no-smoking warning signs, remove all ashtrays from the mall’s premises ,and every 15 minutes announce the ban on public address systems. Normally, as in any civil suit, the plaintiff and the defendant are offered an out-of- court settlement. Accepting the offer, the two parties prepared such a settlement, dropping the plaintiff’s demand for an apology by the defendant for the past failure to enforce the smoking ban. But just before the agreement was signed, the defendant demanded that Fakta drop the whole lawsuit, a demand flatly rejected by the citizens’ group. “If we drop the lawsuit, then it means there never was a case and that there was never any problem with the shopping mall,” said Tubagus. The lawsuit remains. Jajang Jamaludin

Comments


Disclaimer: The views expressed in the comments sections are personal responses that do not represent the editorial policy of tempo.co. Our editorial staff reserves the right to moderate or take down comments that contain harassment, intimidation and discrimination against ethnicity, religion, race, and inter-group relations.