CONTROVERSIAL PORNOGRAPHY BILL POISED TO TARGET

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 JAKARTA 003159 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS SECSTATE FOR EAP/IET AND DRL E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM PGOV KJUS KCRM KWMN ID SUBJECT: CONTROVERSIAL PORNOGRAPHY BILL POISED TO TARGET WOMEN AND FREEDOM OF EXPRSSION SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (U) Indonesian political interest groups portray the ongoing legislative debate over a pornography law as a struggle for the nation's soul. Some fear that Islamists see the bill as a way to impose a strict "Arabic" ethos while conservatives believe the time as nigh to take a stand against moral decay, painting their opponents as "Islamophobic" and corrupted by Western influence. As the debate continues, most influential Indonesian opinion makers have felt compelled to state positions. President Yudhoyono endorsed quick passage of the bill, seeming to side with Muslim conservatives, though he did not comment on details in the legislation. In the latest turn, political opponents to the Yudhoyono Administration have come out against the bill. The draft version of the law makes writings, art, audio recordings and the broadcasting of kissing in public, sensual body parts and sexual movements punishable by large fines and jail sentences ranging from one to fifteen years. Women's groups and artists, the most vocal opponents of the bill, cite the right to freedom of expression and the disparate impact on women as reasons to reject the bill. Indonesia's decision on the pornography law will stand as a significant bellwether for times to come. End Summary. YUDHOYONO, ISLAMIC GROUPS AND PARTIES: PUSH TO PASS THE BILL -------------- -------------- ¶2. (U) Indonesia's conservative Council of Ulamas (MUI), Indonesia's highest interpretive body of shari'a, initially drafted the "anti-pornography/pornoaction" bill in 2001, according to Husna Mulya, Coordinator of the Legal and Policy Reform Division at the Women's Commission of Human Rights (Komnas Ham Perempuan). Members of the previous House of Representatives (DPR) further developed the bill, but then President Megawati did not approve it for government submission to the DPR. President Yudhoyono (SBY) formally submitted the legislation in 2005. The DPR assigned a special committee (PANSUS) to review the Pornography and Pornoaction bill, and the PANSUS began formal deliberation in January. It solicited comments from civil society through the end of February. According to the press, the PANSUS has targeted passage of the law in June. ¶3. (U) Indri Octavani of the Legal Aid Society for Women (LBH-APIK) told us February 14 that the Prosperous Justice party (PKS) and SBY's Party, the Democratic Party, seek to pass the bill quickly, envisioning a trial period from March to June to test the law but without the criminal penalties. Octavani thought only Megawati's party, the Indonesian Democratic Party - Struggle (PDI-P) opposed its passage as drafted. Octavani thought that PKS, widely seen as the country's most conservative Islamist party, and the Democratic Party had enough influence to push the bill through. She explained that no one wants to appear "non-Islamic" or "pro-pornography" and that this seemed a politically popular issue to push. ¶4. (SBU) One female member of the PANSUS from the Muslim-based National Mandate Party (PAN) told us she saw the bill as an important safeguard for the country's morals and it should pass after some sensible revisions that protected women. Given the controversy surrounding the bill, she indicated deliberations could take many months. Deputy Assistant for Social Culture and Environment at the Ministry for Women's Empowerment, Sofinas Asaari, predicted that it would take several months more of deliberation and compromise before the DPR passes the bill. ¶5. (U) In December, the press quoted SBY as saying that the Pornography and Pornoaction Bill must pass and that he agreed "100 percent" with the work done at the DPR. More recently, he told national Muslim leaders that, "the Constitution says that human rights are absolute unless they contravene accepted values of decency and norms." He also expressed strong support for the bill during a televised call-in phone chat with popular Muslim tele-preacher Aa Gym. ¶6. (U) Other politically influential figures publicized their support for the bill in the media, including the leaders of the two biggest Indonesian Islamic mass organizations, Muhammadiyah and Nahdlatul Ulama (NU),with both groups citing the need to protect the morality of the nation. NU Chairman Hasyim Muzadi stated that, "NU supports the JAKARTA 00003159 002 OF 004 pornography bill. Its formulation, however, must be acceptable to all parties. This law is important to guarantee the future survival of the nation's youth." NU women's movement leader Khofifah Indar Parawansa stated that her members supported the bill and that concerns over limits to freedom of expression should get addressed through exceptions in the law. More strident comments came from conservative senior figures in NU, such as Ma'ruf Amin who in public comments criticized those who opposed the bill as "followers of freedom without limits." Muhammadiyah Chairman Din Syamsuddin chimed in with his support of the legislation, while calling for dialogue to resolve o utstanding issues based on a common position that rejects pornography. Islamic militants, like the terrorist-linked Indonesia Mujahiddin Council (MMI) and the Islam Defenders Front (FPI),have added their voices in strong support of the bill. STUDENTS: DEMONSTRATE IN FAVOR OF THE BILL -------------- ¶7. (SBU) Octavani told us many students also favor the bill but, after having discussions with them, concluded that they have a simplistic understanding of its contents. They assume that anyone against the bill favors pornography. Octavani suspects the bill seems popular with students and others because it symbolizes rejection of Western or American values. Recent months have seen an increasing number of student-led demonstrations pressing for passage. Banners messages included "Support the Anti-Porno Bill, Reject American Cultural Imperialism." Dr. Amirshya Tambunan, expert staff to PAN and leading member of the youth branch of Muhammadiyah, Indonesia's second largest Islamic organization, said he expected the number of demonstrators to increase in coming months. BILL SEEN AS A REJECTION OF WESTERNISM -------------- ¶8. (SBU) The press recently quoted the head of the PANSUS, Balkan Kaplale, as saying that European Union and American officials had approached him to lobby against the bill but that he rejected international influence. (Note: We have not contacted Kaplale on this matter. End note.) The article claimed the bill would fortify Indonesia against Western moral corruption produced in the name of human rights and freedom of expression. Asaari also said that an anti-pornography bill would protect Indonesian values from Western influence. She used the example of kissing in public as something acceptable for Americans but not for Indonesians. Tambunan told us that the bill would fight the morally corrupt influences of "globalism" and accused many of those who oppose the bill of putting business interests before morality. In a recent meeting with foreign journalists, Din Syamsuddin, head of Muhammadiyah pointed out that one problem with the controversial publication of Playboy in Indonesia was that it came "from America." (Note: A local business initiated the publication of an Indonesian version of Playboy. End note.) The cover of the popular Islamist magazine "Sabili" depicted the Playboy logo with the title "Moral Terror." BILL TARGETS WOMEN AND CHILDREN AS CRIMINALS -------------- ¶9. (SBU) Women's groups say that what they hoped would prove a law to protect women and children from sexual exploitation and objectification will now likely serve as a tool to target them. LBH-APIK, in partnership with a coalition of feminist NGOs, went to DPR hearings to voice their concern that the definition of pornography focuses on criminalizing female behavior rather than protecting possible victims of trafficking. The Women's Commission of Human Rights did not take an official position against the bill at the DPR's public hearings but will establish one in conjunction with the Commission of Human Rights (Komnas Ham) in coming weeks. In the meantime, members of the Women's Commission of Human Rights lobbied against the bill in their individual capacities. Asaari of the Ministry for Women's Empowerment said that her Ministry's had the official position that Indonesia needs an anti-pornography bill but the bill should protect women as "victims." She added that she personally thought that adults shou ld be allowed to purchase pornography in a regulated market. JAKARTA 00003159 003 OF 004 ¶10. (U) Members of LBH-APIK and Komnas Ham Perempuan pointed out examples from the bill that indicate women and girls will get punished for what men find sexual. The bill outlaws: -- The showing of or bringing attention to in public "sensual" body parts, either through full or partial exposure. The bill defines "sensual body part" as the breasts, buttocks, naval, thighs, or genitals of a woman. The penalty for exposing a sensual and feminine body part is two and half years to 12 years in prison and/or 300 million to 2 billion Rupiah (approx. 30 thousand to 2 hundred thousand dollars). The bill makes no mention of male body parts. -- Any "erotic" dancing or movement in public is punishable by one and a half to seven years in prison and a fine of 150 million to 750 million Rupiah (approx. $15,000 to $75,000). -- Being a model that reveals sensual body parts or moves erotically is punishable by one and a half to seven years in prison and 150 million Rupiah to 750 million Rupiah fine (approx. $15,000 to $75,000). -- The bill applies to adults and defines anyone over the age of 12 as an adult, in contradiction to other national laws, such as the Child Protection Act that defines a child as someone under 18. ¶11. (U) Another often cited provision of the law makes kissing on the lips in public illegal (one to five years in prison and a fine of one million to five million Rupiah). The bill further provides for an appointed body of citizens to review suspected material or conduct to determine whether it is "pornographic" in nature and thus subject to legal sanction. One contact surmised only half-jokingly that - if enacted - the bill's largest practical impact would be to enrich Indonesian police officials, as law violators would scramble to pay bribes in order to evade prosecution. Other contacts have warned that vague language in the bill would create openings for militant Islamic vigilantes, like those of FPI, to "enforce" the law as they interpret it in the most restrictive way possible, a pattern already demonstrated in the areas of church closings and raids on entertainment businesses. ARTISTS: FIGHT FOR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION -------------- ¶12. (U) Artists like to cite an ongoing police investigation commonly known as the "Anjasmara" case as an example of how the criminal code already covers obscenity, and argue that further restrictions would destroy creativity. In the Anjasmara case, police charged two model/actors, a painter and a photographer for obscenity and insulting Islam after the FPI filed complaints. The painting, displayed at a prestigious Jakarta bi-annual art exhibition in 2005, consisted of two nude models in asexual poses in a garden holding fruit. On February 23, leading Balinese artists convened to discuss their rejection of the pornography bill. They discussed the impact the bill could have on tourism, art, traditional dance, and multiculturalism within Indonesia. REVISIONS LIKELY BEFORE PASSAGE -------------- ¶13. (SBU) We obtained from Tambunan a poll from a recent DPR public hearing that recorded 23 out of 70 NGOs were officially in favor of the bill. We noted, however, that of NGOs in favor of the bill, some were high school groups and NGOs formed for the purpose of eradicating pornography. Most women's organizations and press organizations voiced objections. Some stated in the poll that the law against obscenity in the criminal code was sufficient. Tambunan acknowledged that many, if not most, agreed that revisions would be necessary and predicted that as much as 50 percent of the bill could be changed before the DPR passes it. Tambunan was reluctant to say which provisions needed amendment, but predicted that exceptions would be added for Bali and Papua, both parts of Indonesia that are traditionally less restrictive about partial or full nudity. Asaari agreed that it would be several months before the bill is made into law. INFLUENTIAL CRITICS SPEAK OUT -------------- JAKARTA 00003159 004 OF 004 ¶14. (U) In the latest turn, prominent political opponents of the Yudhoyono Administration stated their opposition to the current draft. The press reported that former President and PDI-P Chairwoman Megawati Soekarnoputri, former House speaker Akbar Tandjung and former Vice President Try Sutrisono have come out publicly against the bill as it now stands. In a speech in Bali, a PDI-P stronghold, Megawati was quoted as saying, "I disagree with the bill because it is inappropriate and poorly worded. I've instructed my party to deal with it cautiously and seriously." Akbar Tandjung was equally critical, saying, "Don't create laws that reject (local) systems and cultures." Demonstrations in Bali, where traditional culture and the tourist trade would be threatened by the bill's expansive and vague definitions, have been frequent. During one protest, the head of the Bali branch of the National Youth Committee threatened Bali's secession if the bill were passed. COMMENT -------------- ¶15. (SBU) While it is unclear whether the supporters of the pornography bill will succeed in passing the law in the next few months, the bill's theme, if not its contents, has popular resonance based on public rejection of pornography. The legislative debate takes place against the backdrop of more local governments considering morality ordinances with direct or indirect grounding in conservative interpretations of Islamic tenets. The question remains whether the pornography bill will pass with the necessary changes to protect women and girls from being the target of the law and to preserve Indonesia's cultural diversity and freedom of expression. The national debate over the pornography bill has grown sharp and often has little to do with pornography per se. The elites increasingly view this as an important signal for Indonesia's future, one that either moves toward state imposition of a more conservative, Middle Eastern inspired ethos, or a future that maintains the diversity and tolerance that currentl y frame Indonesia's pluralistic democracy. While the country will not change overnight regardless of the outcome, the final contents of the pornography law will stand as a significant bellwether for Indonesia's direction as a nation. PASCOE