AJI’s Stance on Intelligence Draft Bill

The general public was surprised by the plan to enact Intelligence Draft Bill on October 11 2011 in General Assembly session of the House of Representatives. 

 

Alliance of Independent Journalists (Aliansi Jurnalis Independen) Indonesia calls for the House of Representatives and the Government to refrain from immediate enactment of Intelligence Draft Bill considering a myriad of potential conflicts with civil liberties of the citizens, threats to journalists and contradiction with existing regulations. 

Commission I of the House of Representatives has released the updated version of Intelligence Draft Bill and made some adjustments on crucial issues such as the authority to arrest and detain and also to intercept and criminal sanction to those who leak intelligence secrets. Those are far from sufficient considering there are other articles potentially endangering the democratic life and the freedom of the press.   

An example is Article 32 on intercept. The authority of intelligence officers to intercept should only be limited to special circumstances with clear legal guidelines such as civil emergency, military emergency or wartime emergency announced under clear legal guidelines and State accountability. 

AJI endorses restrictions or limitations to be applied to the authority to “intercept” into more detailed provision and not to be applied in the situation of civil order or when the State is secured. In relation to Press issues on Article 26, Intelligence Draft Law states that anybody or any legal entity is prohibited to leak and/or open intelligence secret – meaning that anyone proved to leak or open state secret will face criminal sanction, regulated in Article 44 and 45 of Intelligence Draft Bill, of 10 years in prison and 7 years in prison and/or hundred of million rupiahs of fee. 

AJI sees that Article 26 of Intelligence Draft Act is open to a wide range of interpretation and is potentially in conflict with other terms. Definition of “intelligence secret” stipulated in Article 25 is not in line with the definitio of “state information.”

AJI views that Article 26 of Intelligence Draft Act is prone to abuse of power of State officials particularly to safeguard their powers. Potential victims of this article are journalists or press workers who publish information or conduct investigative journalism and disseminate its information to the general public. AJI evaluates this article as a potential threat to press freedom. Press Law no 40 of 1999 has regulated the tasks and functions of the press, particularly Article 4 point (2) which states that no censorship, ban or prohibition of broadcast should be allowed to national press, (3) national press has the right to seek, obtain and disseminate ideas and information under press freedom, (4) journalists are equipped with Right to Refuse to safeguard the identity of their sources. It should also be taken into consideration that journalists are guaranteed under two simultaneous laws: Press Law no 40 of 1999 and Openness of Public Information no 14 of 2008. 

AJI also sees that the definition of “state secret” in the same article of Article 26 of Intelligence Draft Act is in conflict with the definition stated in Openness of Public Information no 14 of 2008. Article 17 of Openness of Public Information regulates two categories of information to be provided by Public Body – exempted and open information. Exempted information itself is regulated in Openness of Public Information Law – categorized as any information that might threat national security and defense. Why regulate the same issue under different laws? 

Based on the abovementioned concerns, Alliance of Independent Journalists declare the following points:

 

1.AJI demands Commission I of the House of Representatives, the Government and civil society to have common understanding, perception and definition on “state secret” and its differentiation with “state information” – considering that this definition is crucial to journalists in their duty to disseminate information to the general public.  

 

2.AJI reminds the House of Representatives and the Government to pay attention to the aspiration expressed by the public, including civil society with concerns to the future of Indonesia. The formulation of law should reflect the spirit of the era and not be abused to cater the interest of the authority. Indonesia has left its secrecy regime as it is open to abuse of power. 

Since 1999, Indonesia has adopted open and ethical press and therefore any other regulations in conflict with press freedom and openness of public information should be reviewed. 

3.AJI calls for journalists and the general public to safeguard press freedom and freedom of information with consideration of journalists code of ethics and professional accountability. Each citizen should safeguard the space of freedom of expression as prescribed by law. 

 

Jakarta, 10 October 2011

AJI Executive Director                                 Secretary General

Nezar Patria                                              Jajang Jamaludin

 

For further information, contact: 

Advocacy Division, Eko Maryadi (Item) 0811.852.857