T

he Supreme Court has released its full ruling in the case of Baiq Nuril Maknun, a West Nusa Tenggara woman who was convicted of defaming her alleged sexual harasser.

The court sentenced Nuril to six months’ imprisonment and fined her Rp 500 million (US$34,218) after finding her guilty of defaming the principal of the public high school where she worked. The court ruled that she violated Article 27 of the Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE) Law.

The article forbids the “deliberate and unauthorized” distribution or transmission of electronic information or documents containing indecent content.

The Mataram District Court previously found Nuril not guilty of the charges in July 2017, but prosecutors submitted a cassation petition to the Supreme Court shortly after.

The 37-year-old mother-of- three was accused of circulating a recording of a phone call in which the principal, Haji Muslim, related the sordid details of an affair he had with another woman. She claimed that she only taped the phone call and that the recording was distributed by another person.

The Supreme Court’s ruling affirmed Nuril’s claims as it laid out that Nuril’s colleague Haji Imam Mudawin was the one who distributed the recording and that Nuril had merely given her phone to him, the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR) said.

ICJR researcher Genoveva Alicia said the conclusion that the court came to did not seem logical given the facts it cited in the ruling.

“First of all, the article mentions ‘unauthorized’; Nuril is clearly authorized because she is a victim and was going to use the recording to report the perpetrator to the authorities,” she said on Sunday.

“Secondly, [...] the court itself stated that it was Haji Imam Mudawin who distributed the recording.”

Genoveva said that because all Nuril did was give her mobile phone to Imam, her actions did not violate the ITE Law. “She didn’t distribute any electronic information or documents.”

The ruling, made on Sept. 26 by a three-panel bench presided by female justice Sri Murwahyuni, also said that one of the factors that incriminated Nuril was that her actions “ended Haji Muslim’s career as a principal, humiliated his extended family and violated his dignity”.

ICJR executive director Anggara said the Supreme Court should have upheld the Mataram District Court’s decision to acquit Nuril; while Genoveva said the ruling that the group described as “confusing” further showed that President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo should pardon Nuril.

Last month, the ICJR and other activists met with the Executive Office of the President to present a written request and a copy of a petition signed by over 100,000 people in support of a pardon.

Jokowi has since said that Nuril should submit a case review instead.

“We believe that a pardon is the correct decision because the ruling shows that this is a faulty case,” Genoveva said. “So Nuril should have all the legal consequences from the case wiped from her record.”

Nuril’s lawyer Joko Dumadi said her legal team was still analyzing the Supreme Court’s ruling in preparation for the case review.

“We are compiling the case review documents and we plan to submit it before the new year,” he said.