T

he Information and Electronic Transactions Law may become a tool of political censorship, journalists and lawyers attending a regional seminar organized by the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) concluded Thursday.

"I believe there will be many *free riders' on this law, which is meant to ensure the protection of online and electronic business transactions," said the AJI's Kurie Suditomo.

She defined free riders as those who could misuse the law to repress freedom of expression.

Prominent lawyer Todung Mulya Lubis said the law, passed in 2008, was actually necessary.

He said it stipulated that printed material from the Internet and electronic media could be used as evidence in court, which was very helpful for the business community.

"However, the law was made by incompetent and corrupt lawmakers who have mixed defamation into a law that supposedly regulates only business transactions," he said.

"To make things worse, the law enforcement officials implementing the law are equally incompetent and corrupt."

Jim Nolan, legal consultant for the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), warned the law could be used as a political censorship tool.

"This has happened in authoritarian countries where governments have made online defamation laws because they were worried about the free political discussions on the Internet," he said.

He warned that under the law, a story published in print media could land the writer 12 months in jail, while the same story online could carry a separate six-year sentence.

This could cause trouble for Indonesian publications with both print and online editions, he said.

Bayu Wicaksono, co-founder of the Press Legal Aid Foundation, said the law had not initially been drafted with censorship in mind.

"One of the legislators who drafted the law said it had been recommended by Bank Indonesia, which wanted to protect electronic business transactions," he said.

"My institution is worried this law will cause trouble for journalists. However, there's been only one journalist charged under this law."

Bayu added at least six people had been charged with online defamation under the law. The most notorious case is that of Prita Mulyasari.

"Most of the defamation cases are linked to personal insults posted on networking websites," he said.

The problem with the law, he went on, was that it was open to several interpretations: the specific article on defamation has a very limited explanation of its usage, and does not differentiate between the various kinds of defamation.

Nolan said the law was draconian because it had a very dramatic effect on individuals. He said it was not fair to jail people for expressing opinions, no matter how wrong their opinions might be.

Nolan quoted Communication and Information Technology Minister Muhammad Nuh, who said, "The media and bloggers only have the right to electronically publish information that does not defame others or offend tribal affiliations, religion, race or societal group status."