Save our democracy

The Jakarta Post ,  Jakarta   |  Wed, 09/26/2007 3:23 PM  |  Opinion

This appeal may come a little too late, but it's still worth a shot. To the honorary members of the House of Representatives, we are appealing to your sense of duty in serving the people and asking you to do the right thing in the current deliberation of the bill on transparency in public information.

The bill, the Indonesian equivalent to the Freedom of Information Act in the United States (and similar laws in many other democratic countries) is now in the last stages of the legislative process. This week, the working committee of the House's Commission I is expected to finalize its work and come up with a final draft. The current plan is to have the final reading at the House plenary session either on Oct. 2 or 9.

The legislation seeks to compel the government to disclose public information if and when it becomes available or upon the request of members of the public, including the media. The experience of other countries shows that the law promotes transparency and accountability in government, and enhances the role of the media in providing democratic checks and balances.

For Indonesia, this will enhance the quality of its democracy.

Six years in the works, the bill, which was drawn up by activists, media people and some members of the House, has undergone so many alterations that it is now changed beyond recognition.

Here is a bill where the interests of the government and the people are likely to be in constant conflict. One seeks to conceal and the other seeks full disclosure. And looking at the latest version of the bill, the government seems to have had the upper hand in the deliberations.

Djoko Susilo, a member of Commission 1 who has been involved in the bill since the beginning, said the government deployed tactics to wear down House members. ""We're reaching the point of fatigue,"" he confessed at a seminar to discuss the status of the bill in Jakarta on Monday.

Symbolic of the government's power is the way it changed the title of the bill, which was originally the freedom to obtain public information bill. One insider said the government objected to the term ""freedom"", arguing that it was an imported concept. But if that is their argument, what about the 1945 Constitution, which has more than a dozen references to ""freedom""?

Also changed is the spirit of the legislation. While it regulates the right of the public to access information, it does not spell out in details the obligations of government to meet this right, therefore leaving the mechanism largely at the discretion of the government.

The government has also made the exemptions from ""public information"" as vague as possible so that they are open to many interpretations.

The bill limits the penalty for government officials who fail to comply to a maximum of Rp 10 million, to be paid out of the state budget (read: taxpayers' money). The government also exempted state companies from the legislation, although they are recipients and managers of public funds.

The worst part of the latest version of the bill is the introduction of an article on ""abuse of public information"" whereby offenders are liable for prosecution. This is a vague article (how can you abuse public information?), but one that activists suspect could be stretched to suit the needs and interests of the government.

The government may be winning many of the battles, but it has not won the war. The bill, with all its shortcomings, is still a worthy document that would enhance the transparency and accountability of the government, and improve the environment for the media to carry out its function as the fourth estate.

There is another strong reason why the bill, one of the few initiated by the House (instead of the government) should be passed without any further delays.

The government has submitted the bill on state secrecy, and ensured that it got fast-tracked in the House agenda. This bill, which runs counter to the spirit of the public information bill, is also in the final stages of deliberations. This bill could negate the few gains we are making in transparency in public information by making more public information classified.

There is still time for members of the House to do the honorable thing and salvage as much as they can of the original intentions of the bill on transparency in public information, which is to assure the people that they have the right to know about their government.

For all intents and purposes, the bill on transparency in public information should be passed according to the schedule, even if it is less than perfect.

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.