THE BARE FACTS: Papuans wearing traditional costumes rally in front of the House of Representatives in a protest against the pornography bill. The bill, which has since become law, has been criticized for undermining local cultures. (JP/R. Bertho Wedhatama)

The House of Representatives apparently turned a blind eye to the strong opposition of various sectors of society across the country, finally ratifying the controversial pornography bill two years after its inception in 2006.

On Oct. 30, with overwhelming support from 10 of 12 parties, the House passed the bill. The Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) and the Prosperous Peace Party (PDS), however, demonstrated their opposition in dramatic fashion, walking out of the House during plenary sessions.

Sealing the bill's fate (and perhaps that of the nation), President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono went ahead and quietly signed the bill into law on Nov. 26 (although it would have become law 30 days after the House passed it regardless of the President's endorsement).

Now that it is law, and any sex-related material deemed in violation of public morality is criminalized, the Bali Provincial Legislative Council, local communities and tourism associations have vowed to file for judicial review.

Governor Made Mangku Pastika, meanwhile, has stated that Bali simply will not enforce the law.

Legislators and officials have said the law has been revised from previous drafts and no longer undermines local cultures, and tolerates, for instance, beachwear on the beach.

But many remain unconvinced, fearing that zealots with only a little knowledge of the law might take the law into their own hands.

In Bali the law is considered an insult to its culture and a violation of personal rights, and is also feared to threaten tourism on the island.

Some articles of the law, including the description of pornography itself, have outraged not only the Balinese but people in other provinces including Yogyakarta, West Papua and North Sulawesi.

Opposition is widespread and comes from diverse groups. Ardent opponents view the law as nothing but a politically motivated tool, designed to attract Muslim voters (the nation's majority) to the parties that supported it. Some claim this is part of an attempt by Islamic fundamentalists to push the country closer to adopting sharia law while women's rights advocates say the law is offensive to women as it simplistically considers them the root cause of sexual lust.

A series of street rallies held across Bali in opposition to the pornography bill frequently made headlines. The torch has been passed from former governor Dewa Made Berata to newly elected Made Mangku Pastika, who must now fight for the will of his people.

The federal government, however, has on many occasions claimed that the pornography law is designed to protect women and children, as, they say, it will be more effective than established legislation.

State Minister for Women's Empowerment Meutia Hatta, for example, said many groups did not fully understand the pornography law and the changes made to it in response to the protests.

"The law doesn't only serve one group and it doesn't undermine our diversity," she said on the sidelines of the Kartini Asia network conference in Bali in September.

Religious Affairs Minister M. Maftuh Basyuni said the law was what the country needed to fight pornography, as it would give law enforcers muscle in protecting people from offensive material.

But no remarks from the authorities could stem the ongoing protests, especially not in Bali.

Pastika's remarks that Bali would not enforce the pornography law, made a day after the House passed the bill, reflect the resolute stance of the Balinese people.

"After the passing of the porn bill, we hereby declare that we cannot carry it out because it is not in line with Balinese philosophical and sociological values," Pastika, a retired three-star police general, said, reading the province's written declaration.

Just how the pornography law will be enforced remains unclear, as government regulations have yet to be issued.

Although civil disobedience will impede its implementation, Bali Police chief Insp. Gen. Teuku Ashikin Husein said his office was ready to enforce the law as soon as guidelines were issued.

He avoided questions about how he intended to go about doing this, given the strong opposition of both the provincial administration and the people, saying that once the (central) government had released administrative guidelines, he would enforce them.

Meanwhile, the Bali People's Component (KRB), an umbrella organization of local intellectuals and artists, is gearing up to file for a judicial review of the law in the Constitutional Court.

The KRB is fully supported by the Indonesian Advocates Association as well as by noted advocate and former Constitutional Court justice I Dewa Gede Palguna. They have invited anyone with legal standing to join the litigation process and are asking for help in raising funds.

KRB coordinator Ngurah Harta said the organization would request autonomy status for Bali if the petition attempt fails.

"If the request (for a judicial review) is rejected too, we are ready for civil disobedience," he said.

Tourism organizations, including the Bali Tourism Workers Union (SP Par), the Bali Tourism Board (BTB) and executives of the Association of the Indonesian Tour and Travel Agencies (ASITA), have also voiced their opposition to the law.

It is feared that certain groups will use Article 21 of the law, which allows any group or individual to engage in preventive measures, in effect to take the law into their own hands, thus increasing the risk of civil conflict.

The island's tourism industry, which has just recovered after the bombings in 2002 and 2005, would again suffer immensely if violent conflict erupted.

Around 60 percent of Bali's workforce depends on tourism and creative industries. Many make a living selling nude paintings and works of art, as well as souvenir bottle openers and keychains in the shape of male genitalia in major tourists centers.

The law threatens those who produce or distribute anything that could be seen as having the potential to arouse sexual desire with considerable prison terms and hefty fines.

Made Darma Kandi, a sculptor, questioned the logic behind the law, claiming that pornography had little to do with external objects and a lot to do with what is inside the mind.

"Balinese believe the human body has an aesthetic value, while the porn law supporters view it as the source of sin and lust. This is the major difference between us and them," Sugilanus, from the KRB, said.

Popular

Magnitude 6.5 earthquake strikes off Java island: authorities

Philippines to endure extreme heat until mid-May

Indonesia one step from Olympics after beating South Korea