Bagir Manan: Loving Democracy Means Tolerating A Free Press

TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Five months after the new government was formed, threats to freedom of the press began to emerge. Not long ago, the reporters of Tribunnews and Warta Kota were reported to the police because they published chats between two Jakarta City Council legislators, Lulung Lunggana and Muhammad Taufik, which had appeared in social media's WhattsApp. Before that, the English-language daily The Jakarta Post was reported to the police for publishing a cartoon considered to offend Islam, leading its chief editor Meidyatama Suryodiningrat to be indicted. Tempo magazine is currently being sued for publishing the bank accounts of Police Comr. Gen. Budi Gunawan, who was slated to become national police chief.

Bagir Manan, chairman of the Press Council admits he is worried at this development. "I don't know why the police are so charged up about this," he commented. His concern is understandable, given that the Press Law provides a way out of public disputes with media organizations, and that's arbitration through the Press Council. An MoU to this effect was signed between the police and the Press Council, which essentially says that any public dissatisfaction with the media should be settled through the Press Council's mediation, not by being charged for committing a crime by the police.

Tempo reporters Jajang Jamaludin and Heru Triyono last week interviewed Bagir Manan, 74, at his office in the Press Council Building. This law professor reiterated the importance of a free press in a democracy and what should be done by the government to ensure that freedom of the press is protected. Excerpts:

Based on a survey by Freedom House in 2014, Indonesia was listed as number 132 out of 194 countries on press freedom, on a level with Cambodia and Thailand, in fact, below Papua New Guinea.

That standing is based on a survey taken overseas. Are we really at the same level as Cambodia? That makes no sense because it's not real. The Cambodian press is unlikely to be more free than ours.

Why do you think the world sees our press as less free than in Cambodia or Thailand?

Former Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra recently said she would sue the press. If that had happened in Indonesia, you can imagine how that would go. No, we will never go that way. The media in Indonesia [dares to] take a stand. For example, during the presidential election last year, the press came out with diverse views. TV One, Metro TV, Kompas, MNC, Tempo all had their own stand. Of course, there were protests, but nothing more. Why shouldn't we express our opinion? Protesting is part of being free and is one of our human rights.

But threats against press freedom still exist in Indonesia. The police in Ambon recently went to the editorial office of a local media organization and threatened to kill one of the reporters.

I admit such cases still happen. But they are aberrations, not part of the system.

What kind of action against the media would be part of the system? When they attack through the law?

Exactly. In one discussion, I said that the press freedom can also be achieved through regulations and legislation.

When the Press Law is up against other laws, like Criminal Code or the Banking Law, which one takes precedence?

The answer to that could lead to a long academic debate. The way I see it, look at the issue in question. Because this one pertains to a journalistic piece of work, then the Press Law should take precedence.

Do you feel press freedom in Indonesia needs improvement?

There are two ways of looking at press freedom. There's the red zone, where violence still happens to journalists and media organizations. On the other side, there are people who complain that the media has gone too free. I say let the two compete, because this is what happens in the developed world, differences of opinion regarding press freedom is still being debated. Remember the Watergate case in the US? The media organization which published the information was taken to court, although they eventually won. But the point here is that there still exists ways to attack the press.

But does too much freedom include the privacy of someone suspected of committing a crime?

We must understand the limits of that freedom. Although privacy must be respected, it is also subject to debate, because when a person acquires political and social importance, his privacy declines. We cannot compare the privacy of a president to that of a professor living alone. That person must bear the risk of becoming a public official.

In a democracy, is it right for a journalist to be jailed for his journalistic work?

No. In a democracy, that would be irregular.

What can the Press Council do to protect press freedom?

We can at least reduce the frequency of the press being reported to the police. No matter how bitter the prospect may be, the media and the law enforcers must sit down to discuss this. (*)

Read the full interview in this week’s edition of Tempo English Magazine