A

number of activists and legal experts have questioned a panel of judges who have denied attempts to access information in a high-profile child abuse case implicating two members of teaching staff at Jakarta Intercultural School (JIS).

Last week, the trial entered the witness hearing stage, where JIS kindergarten and elementary school principal Elsa Donohue gave her testimony.

JIS teacher Neil Bantleman and teaching assistant Ferdinant Tjiong could face up to 15 years behind bars as prosecutors charged them under Article 82 of the Child Protection Law for allegedly sexually abusing three kindergarten pupils of the prestigious school.

Limited information on the trial is available. The law stipulates that any trial involving an underage person must be held behind closed doors.

However, last week a panel of judges chaired by Nur Aslam Bustaman added to the sense of isolation surrounding the case by prohibiting any related parties in the trial from making statements to the media, to maintain the trial'€™s
'€œprivacy'€.

Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras) coordinator Haris Azhar said the judges had overstepped their authority by taking such a position.

'€œThe judges have no right to make any regulation beyond the courtroom,'€ he said.

According to him, the main consideration in holding a closed-door trial requirement for cases involving underage persons was to protect the child'€™s psychological condition instead of creating a barrier between the public and any information on the trial.

'€œA closed-door trial does not mean information must be kept inside [the court]. The public has a right to know what happened in the trial, even if it is only from lawyers or prosecutors,'€ Haris told The Jakarta Post on Friday.

Meanwhile, National Commission for Child Protection (Komnas PA) chairman Arist Merdeka Sirait emphasized that a closed-door hearing for a case involving a child was important to protect the child'€™s identity as it could affect the child emotionally and psychologically.

However, Arist said that if the trial did not require the child to be present or mention the identity of the child, it could be opened to the public.

'€œThe essence of a trial being closed to the public is to protect the child'€™s identity. It is regulated in international and national law. But if the child is not present in the trial, it should be fine for the public to attend,'€ Arist said.

During a hearing last Thursday, both lawyers and prosecutors refused to provide any statement to the media. The prosecutor said she would not give any information because '€œthis is the point of having a closed-door hearing'€.

Society of Justice Observation coordinator Choky Ramadhan said there was no legal grounds for the judges to prohibit lawyers or prosecutors releasing information to the public.

'€œIt is more like an ethical code, but the most important thing is the verdict hearing must be open and the court must release the documents to the public,'€ he said on Friday.

Since the beginning, the case has attracted public attention as it allegedly took place in the prestigious school. The mother of one of the alleged victims launched a separate civil suit, seeking US$125 million in compensation from the school.

Previously in December, the South Jakarta District Court declared five PT ISS Indonesia cleaners guilty in the sexual abuse case and sentenced them to seven and eight years'€™ imprisonment, despite defense lawyers'€™ insistence there was a lack of evidence in the three-page indictment.

The prosecutors had earlier demanded 10-year sentences for each defendant.

'€” JP/Indra Budiari