Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06JAKARTA2564
2006-02-26 23:54:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Jakarta
Cable title:  

IMPLEMENTING INDONESIA'S BROADCASTING LAW

Tags:  OIIP OPRC KPAO ID 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0002
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHJA #2564/01 0572354
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 262354Z FEB 06
FM AMEMBASSY JAKARTA
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 0175
UNCLAS JAKARTA 002564

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

DEPT FOR IIP, ALEX FELDMAN

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OIIP OPRC KPAO ID
SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTING INDONESIA'S BROADCASTING LAW

REF: JAKARTA 01820

SUMMARY: The visit of the Coordinator of the Office of
International Information Programs, Alexander Feldman, was
an opportunity to directly engage with the various
constituencies in the on-going discussion of the new
implementing regulations to the Indonesian Broadcast Law of

2002. In a series of meetings, Mr. Feldman spoke with
Sofyan Djalil, Minister of Communication and Information;
members of the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI);
members of Parliament who sit on the Commission directly
involved in the legislation; senior executives and programs
in the broadcasting industry; and journalists and
representatives of media NGOs. While the result was
reminiscent of the fable of the blind men and the elephant
(each group sees the situation very differently) several
conclusions emerged:
--While direct foreign broadcasts may be affected, it does
not appear that banning foreign news programs is the
principal or even a primary goal of the regulations.
--Some media observers saw a developing trend toward the
government seeking to reassert control over the media.
While some increased control is possible, especially
regulation of the airwaves, reforms have gone too far and
too deep for any major change in Indonesia's commitment to
media freedom.
--The heart of the issue is a dispute over whether the
Ministry or the KPI will control the potentially lucrative
area of licensing approval.
END SUMMARY


2. In his discussion of the implementing regulations of the
Broadcast Bill of 2002, Minister of Communication and
Information Sofyan Djalil stressed that the law sought to
put the burden of responsibility for program content on the
stations. He emphasized that broadcasters needed to ensure
that inflammatory news stories (he cited the Danish cartoon
controversy as an example),sadistic violence, and
pornography not be allowed on the air. Since it is
impossible to monitor directly relayed material, a tape
delay is essential to ensure that this sort of material not
be broadcast. The minister was vague, however, on just what
sort of a delay would be acceptable, merely noting that the
details remained to be worked out. He was equally vague on
the standards that would be used in determining what was

acceptable or unacceptable. Mr. Feldman pointed out that
the new regulations were drawing serious criticism in
foreign media to the detriment of Indonesia's post-reformasi
image of a free and open media. He noted that the free
flow of information benefited Indonesia by making world news
available to decision makers. He also noted that the idea
of a delay had precedent in the region, pointing out that
the restrictive model of delays used in Malaysia may not be
the best pattern for Indonesia to adopt. The minister
again asserted that the highly "professional broadcasters of
VOA" had nothing to fear from the new regulations and that
"we will work out the details later, but VOA will not be off
the air." At the moment, broadcasters seem to be dealing
with the new regulations either by introducing a delay or by
simply ignoring the requirement (REF: JAKARTA 01820) and
there is no evidence that the new regulations have affected
VOA, or other foreign broadcasts that are carried on the
airwaves. (Note: The regulations do not/not affect cable
or satellite broadcasting).


3. Turning to other aspects of the broadcasting law,
Minister Djalil discussed the current dispute between the
Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) and the Ministry
over licensing authority. Minister Djalil observed that
during the period between the abolition of President
Soeharto's all-powerful Ministry of Information and now, the
broadcasting industry had been totally without a regulatory
body. During that period, broadcast licenses were not
renewed and many radio stations sprang up operating without
licenses. The minister feels that regaining control of the
airwaves is an essential task and expressed his view that
the Ministry needs to work with the KPI to ensure a system
of checks and balances. Leaving all the decision-making
power in the hands of the KPI, would in the minister's view,
be dangerous since it would centralize power in the hands of
one organization. Seeking to merge the restrictions on
foreign direct broadcasts with this dispute over the role of
the KPI, Minister Djalil implied that the KPI might be more
subject to nationalist sentiment and might even wind up
banning all foreign broadcasts from local airwaves.
[Comment: This was the first time we have heard this
argument raised and it is not what we have been hearing from
the KPI or any other media observer.]


4. In a meeting with journalists and representatives of
media NGOs, a very different view emerged. Media activist
and member of the National Press Council Leo Batubara was
outspoken in his assertion that this was the first step in
an attempt by the government to recreate the powerful media
controls of the Soeharto era. Although the current issue
involves a regulation that would affect only one or two
foreign broadcasters, whose program content is carried on
Indonesian affiliates, leaving satellite and cable
untouched, Batubara sees this as first step in a wide effort
to throttle Indonesia's free media. In this view, once
control is established in this area, the precedent is set
for restrictions that would eventually include the crucial
issue - the domestic media. While few other observers
were willing to go this far, there was general agreement
among media activists that the Ministry was trying to
undercut the semi-independent KPI, an institution that had
been set up in imitation of the U.S. Federal Communications
Commission. There was general agreement that the ministry
wanted to sideline the commission and that this was driven
by a desire to ensure that the ministry would have the
important, and profitable, final say on licensing issues.
One of the journalists observed that as licenses came up for
renewal, the ministry was far more likely to be involved in
corruption than the independent KPI.


5. Members of the KPI expressed their gratitude for USG
interest in the case when they met with Mr. Feldman. They
felt that the implementing regulations, including the idea
of a delay on direct broadcasts, were a problem, noting that
this has caused VOA's affiliates to drop the interactive
portion of the VOA morning program. KPI representatives
noted that the ministry is seeking to gain greater control
by a) limiting the number of provinces that can be reached
by one station, b) issuing new licenses, c) renewing
existing licenses, and d) issuing regulations regarding
management. Taken together, they constitute an effort to
limit media freedom. On the key issue of licensing, KPI
member Ade Armando noted that there are a number of stations
broadcasting without a license since there were no renewals
or new licenses issued during the period when the Ministry
of Communications and Information had been disbanded. As a
result, there are too many stations for too little
bandwidth. Ade recognized that this needs to be changed,
but he noted that as the situation is remedied, there will
be competition for airspace and opportunity for bribery. In
his view, this is the key reason why the Ministry is so
eager to reassert control.


6. During meetings with media executives, a similar view of
the KPI-Ministry struggle emerged, but the conclusions were
different. While all of the stations carry considerable
U.S. program material, few carried direct foreign
broadcasting (largely news) that would be affected by the
new regulations. An official of Trans TV asserted that one
concern of the Indonesian parliament was to stop
televangelists from putting Indonesia's sometimes fragile
inter-religious relationship under stress, an explanation
that seems doubtful given that the only evangelical
broadcasts are found on cable and satellite TV. For the
broadcasters, however, the issue was again licensing; one
senior program manager observed that the reason the industry
was supporting the ministry in its dispute with the KPI was
that they thought it would be easier to deal with the
professionals in the ministry who have had experience
handling licensing issues than the inexperienced and
unpredictable academics who make up most of the KPI.


7. The final group to offer its opinion was members of the
parliament's (DPR) Commission I. Member Djoko Suslio noted
that he was one of the original drafters of the Broadcasting
law and that it was written in a deliberate attempt to
imitate the U.S. FCC. The parliamentary commission had,
just that week, rejected the implementing regulations and
was seeking to send the matter to the Constitutional Court.
Djoko opined that the ministry was seeking to undo what the
parliament had done in setting up an independent body and
observed, in agreement with NGO observers, that the ministry
is more likely to take bribes than the KPI. The parliament
recognizes that the extended period of media anarchy needs
to end but Djoko proposes open and transparent auctions of
licenses and clear regulations ending the transfer of
licenses. He cited several examples of how licenses
obtained by one individual are "sold" to media conglomerates
for large sums of money. As for foreign broadcasters,
members of parliament admitted that they had problems with
some of the broadcasts but stressed the need to regulate
rather than ban.


8. Comment: In the end, as with so many disputes in
Indonesia, the key issue in the implementing regulations of
the broadcast law is money. Parliament, the NGO community
and the KPI line up against the industry and the ministry.
At stake is a considerable amount of money to be realized
over the sale and renewal of broadcasting licenses. There
are, too be sure, other issues and the delay of direct
broadcasts is one, but these are secondary issues. Like
many laws, this one has a bit of something for everyone, and
while there may be some who would like to turn the clock
back to the Soeharto era, there is little indication that
this can or will happen. As for VOA and BBC broadcasts,
these will most likely be dealt with through an "Indonesian"
solution that will allow broadcasts to continue with what we
hope will be minimal disruption.

PASCOE