"In Indonesia, there is No Justice for the Rich, Only the Poor," by Matthew Moore The Age / ABC News 11:37am 14th Feb, 2004   February 14, 2004    "Judge's dissent on Speaker stuns Indonesia" (The Age)    Akbar Tanjung may be free, but a Supreme Court judge says he took part in a corrupt practice, writes Matthew Moore.    Something unusual happened in Jakarta's Supreme Court on Thursday, and it wasn't the decision to overturn parliamentary Speaker Akbar Tanjung's conviction for embezzling money meant for the poor. Everyone was expecting Indonesia's justice system would do that and maintain its perfect record of never jailing any big name politician.    To soften up the public in advance, the details of the decision had been carefully leaked along with the curious legal reasoning - Mr Akbar could not be convicted because he was just following orders from then Indonesian president B. J. Habibie who told him to take 40 billion rupiah ($A6 million) of Government money.    What was unprecedented was that after the eight-hour decision was read, while Mr Akbar was still busy throwing himself on the floor in gratitude to God, one of the five judges read a dissenting decision.    It was the first dissenting decision in the Supreme Court's history. And Judge Abdurrahman Saleh delivered it with a punch. He said Mr Akbar had engaged in "corrupt practice" was guilty of "shameful conduct because he failed to show minimal appropriate efforts to protect state money... which the president had entrusted to him". He listed a whole series of Mr Akbar's failings, which he said proved the findings of two lower courts were right.    And in doing so, he echoed the feelings and frustrations of the millions of Indonesia's poor and middle class who every day see proof of corruption of their leaders in the media and yet never see punishment meted out.    "In Indonesia, there is no justice for the rich, only the poor," was how my cab driver put it as he drove me home after the judgement. There, I was met by two normally meek housemaids who echoed his views.    Anti-corruption campaigners and prominent lawyers deplored the decision. Ombudsman Commission chairman Antonius Sujata branded it "a miscarriage of justice". "With this decision the public will have no more confidence in the judicial system and the Government's efforts to stop corruption," he said.    Prominent corporate lawyer Todung Mulya Lubis described the finding as "a sad day for this country".    Mr Akbar's success in finally clearing his name in the courts opens the way for him to be nominated as the presidential candidate for the Golkar Party of former president Soeharto.    The decision shows the clout the chairman of Golkar has. So too does the fact that none of his Golkar rivals for the presidency sought to orchestrate any serious violence outside the court on Thursday to show that Mr Akbar was an electoral liability and improve their own chances. Indeed his major rival, former defence chief General Wiranto, dropped into Mr Akbar's house to congratulate him on the verdict.    Mr Akbar's backers are insisting that now the court has acquitted him, his reputation in the eyes of the public will be gradually restored and that he can run for president.    But the presidential election this year is different. It is a direct election where people vote for a person not for a party. And whatever the legal niceties, many Indonesians believe Mr Akbar is corrupt and should be in jail.    Whether Mr Akbar can ever get the country's maids and taxi drivers and middle classes to vote for him is something the Golkar hardheads will have to consider.    13 February , 2004    "Tanjung verdict sparks concern in Indonesia"    ABC News Online: PM -  Reporter: Edmond Roy.    MARK COLVIN: Indonesia's judicial system is defending its independence and credibility after the country's Supreme Court overturned a corruption conviction against the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Akbar Tanjung.    A five-judge panel overturned the findings of two separate lower courts that as a minister in the Habibie government Akbar Tanjung helped to embezzle nearly $6.5 million.    Student organisations have held nationwide demonstrations against the verdict, and the head of the judicial panel that sentenced Tanjung for corruption says he will resign in protest. As Edmond Roy reports, many Indonesians are worried about the political implications of Akbar Tanjung's legal victory.    EDMOND ROY: One of the judges reading out the verdict which set Akbar Tanjung free to seek his party's nomination as Presidential candidate in the coming elections.    The five judges ruled that as a minister in the Habibie cabinet in 1999, Akbar Tanjung could not be held responsible for the disappearance of nearly $7 million, which was intended as aid for the poor.    First convicted in September of 2002 to a three-year jail term, this was the verdict he was waiting for.    It leaves him free to run for President, brushing aside the challenge within his party of the former military commander, General Wiranto. But while his camp is genuinely pleased with the verdict, others have expressed their anger.    EDMOND ROY: Students outside the courthouse, calling for the Supreme Court to reverse its decision.    Others too have shown their displeasure.    Among them, the head of the judicial panel which sentenced Akbar Tanjung in the first place. Amiruddin Zakaria headed a panel of Jakarta district court judges, who believed that he had misappropriated 40 billion Rupiah.    Speaking to the Kompass Daily, Amiruddin Zakaria said that he was bitterly disappointed with the Supreme Court verdict and that he felt as if his work was not respected. He said that he would be resigning from the bench.    Also opposed to the verdict was the dissenting judge, Abdurrahman Saleh, who described Akbar Tanjung as guilty of shameful conduct. Indonesian newspapers too have taken a similar tack. The Jakarta Post saying that the Supreme Court decision brings into question the quality of the entire judicial system.    Tim Lindsey is Director of the Asian Law Centre at the University of Melbourne.    TIM LINDSEY: What's happening is that the Indonesian court system is at a crossroads. Under Soeharto it was degraded significantly, and faced common, widespread corruption and allegations of political interference. Since then, the court has taken significant steps to clean itself up. The current Chief Justice is a reformer, the Court itself has recently released its own blueprint for reform, and there are clear signs that this is a Court that's trying to re-establish its reputation in Indonesia.    EDMOND ROY: But this is not going to help.    TIM LINDSEY: Well, whether this decision is right or wrong, it won't help politically. Let's just say that Akbar Tanjung was innocent. That's not the perception of most Indonesians and the Court is now going to be under a great deal of pressure to justify its decision one way or the other.    EDMOND ROY: And it's also going to be under pressure if the Golkar Party does come into power.    TIM LINDSEY: Well, that's correct. This is very interesting for Golkar's prospects in the election because it remains to be seen whether the outcome is that Akbar becomes unelectable or whether he's seen as bullet-proof and in fact strengthens his position. Now, we won't be able to know how this will play out for a few more months.    The question for Megawati – to win, she needs to have one other party to complement her party, PDIP. Who will she choose? Will she choose Golkar? She has around… or previous election had a little bit over 30 per cent. They had a little bit over 20 per cent between them. If they got the same votes they get 50.    On the other hand, if she doesn't want to go with Akbar, then she'll have to go into a coalition with the Muslim party like last time, and that won't get her such a secure vote because their votes are less.    So everything now hinges on whether this taints Akbar. If he gets away with it, and is bullet-proof, then it’s very likely Megawati will go into coalition with him..
	Next (more recent) news item
	Next (older) news item