Confusion Over Verdict Against Erwin Arnada
Former Playboy editor Erwin Arnada is seeking a case review over a controversial Supreme Court ruling that overturned a lower court verdict acquitting him of the indecency charge for publishing the Indonesian edition of the now defunct Playboy magazine. Meanwhile Erwin Arnada has ignored 2 summonses to report for a 2-year jail sentence ordered by the Supreme Court.
The Controversy
There are a couple of unusual developments in this case. First, the Supreme Court verdict finding Erwin Arnada guilty was not delivered a year ago when the verdict was passed. Instead, it was delivered only a couple of weeks ago. Secondly, the Supreme Court’s website also attached a note to the case which reads: “Prosecution rejected.” Exactly what is meant by this note is a mystery as no officials from the Supreme Court would comment on it.
Basis Of Supreme Court Ruling Challenged
Todung Mulya Lubis, lawyer for Erwin Arnada claimed that the Supreme Court based its decision on a law that is different from that used by the lower court. Calling this a flaw, Todung Mulya Lubis said that Erwin Arnada was convicted by the Supreme Court last year based on the Criminal Code but the 2007 trial at the lower court which acquitted him was based on the 1999 Press Law.
Todung Mulya Lubis also said the Supreme Court had unfairly chosen to hear from witnesses called by the prosecutor while refusing to hear expert testimony from the Press Council. Bambang Harymurti, deputy chairman of the Press Council said the council did not agree with how the case had played out.
Erwin Arnada To Appeal
Todung Mulya Lubis said that he would file the appeal for a case review after the end of Ramadan, and a stay of the prison sentence pending the appeal. He said that the issue is now wider than Erwin Arnada. Todung Mulya Lubis said: “We’re not just defending Erwin here, but press freedom as a whole. It’s a matter of principle; it’s not just about Playboy anymore, but it’s about press freedom, a pillar of democracy and free speech.” Todung Mulya Lubis added: “This is a test of the commitment by the government and the courts to guarantee press freedom.”
“We Must Be Objective”
Todung Mulya Lubis said that Playboy Indonesia was very different from other editions of Playboy magazine. The big difference is that Playboy Indonesia did not feature nudity in its pages. Agreeing, Uni Lubis, a Press Council member said that the council reviewed the Playboy Indonesia magazine in 2006“from cover to cover” and found “no violation to the journalistic code of ethics since it contained no nudity.”
Explaining why Playboy Indonesia failed, Todung Mulya Lubis said: “Maybe it was so decent that it failed to sell. We must be objective and regard the magazine as a journalistic product judged by its content, not by its name.”
Referring to the threats from the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) to hunt down Erwin Arnada and arrest him, Todung Mulya Lubis said: “Nobody should take over the role of prosecutors.”
Think About It
What is meant by the phrase “Prosecution Rejected” found in the website of the Supreme Court alongside the listing of this case? Does it mean that the Supreme Court had rejected the prosecution of this case, in effect reinforcing the lower court’s verdict that Erwin Arnada is not guilty of the charge of indecency in publishing Playboy Indonesia? If so, then why did the Supreme Court deliver its guilty verdict to the prosecutor? Aand why do so only a couple of weeks back when it apparently reached its verdict a year ago? Is Todung Mulya Lubis right in saying that the Supreme Court’s verdict is flawed because it did not confine its appeal deliberation based on the Press Law used by the lower court. Does this then mean that the Supreme Court was not actually hearing an appeal, but was in effect starting a new trial of its own based on a different set of laws, the Criminal Code? Will Erwin Arnada win the appeal against the Supreme Court’s verdict?
Previous post
Recent Comments