For Santi, a 29-year-old staffer at a Jakarta law firm, the fun and carefree days of hanging out at a mall in a shoulder-exposing tank top may well be over.

Despite the comfort and confidence she says her attire gives her, Santi is wary of inadvertently violating articles in the recently approved anti-pornography bill.

“I am confused about what to wear now,” she said while strolling around a Central Jakarta mall on Friday.

“But I have to be careful because I’m afraid that walking in public with bare shoulders could be considered by some groups as inciting obscenity.”

The way women dress is one area affected by the far-reaching definition of pornography as stipulated in the bill. It says body movements or gestures perceived as inciting obscenity or violating moral ethics in the community may be considered pornography.

“Who can guarantee that certain groups won’t attack me for what I wear, because they think I’m arousing them? I won’t take the risk,” Santi said.

Patra M. Zen, chairman of the Foundation of the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute (YLBHI), agreed the extensive definition of pornography targeted and criminalized women.

“After all, it’s women who are seen as capable of inciting obscenity in our society,” he said.

The definition, Patra added, placed the creativity of artists, models and designers in danger by potentially labeling their work as pornography.

Articles 8, 34, 36 of the bill stipulate artists and models may face up to 10 years in prison or Rp 5 billion in fines for their involvement in shows considered pornographic.

Observers are also warning the definition invades people’s private lives, with even the exchange of “dirty” jokes, defined as conversation and sound deemed as inciting obscenity — and hence pornographic — punishable by law.

“It’s really an effort to create uniformity in people’s private lives by enforcing a certain one-sided morality without taking into consideration different cultures within our society,” said Hendardi, chairman of the Setara Institute.

He accused political parties of passing the bill only to woo support from Muslim voters ahead of the 2009 elections.

Legal expert Frans H. Winarta and Elsam executive director Agung Putri Astrid Kartika agreed the bill violated the principle of pluralism as enshrined in the Constitution, by defying the aspirations of provinces such as Bali, North Sulawesi and Papua, which all opposed the bill.

Worse, Patra said, the enactment of the bill into law would justify a “morality police”, which could include vigilantes, launching crackdowns on those they believe were in violation of the legislation. The bill allows the public to take part in the fight against pornography.

So what happens to people like Santi, who simply wish to enjoy their lives? They could become the first victims of the moral police, Patra said.

“Nobody supports pornography; but we must focus only on limiting its distribution and protecting our children,” he said.

He warned of a possible bandwagon effect in many regions following the bill’s passage, leading to possible violence and abuse of the law for certain political interests.

Popular

China retaliates against EU ban with import restrictions on medical devices

KPK finds guns, Rp 2.8 billion in the house of an aide close to Bobby Nasution

Analysis: Indonesia’s competitiveness ranking falls amid weakening fundamentals