Abdul Khalik, Jakarta – The House of Representatives is set to push through the pornography bill in October, despite ongoing controversy over the draft law's vague definition of pornography.
Some lawmakers and activists have criticized the controversial bill for criminalizing victims of pornography and threatening the country's pluralism.
Out of the public spotlight, the House's working group (Panja) has finished deliberating the bill and will soon submit it to the special committee (Pansus) for further discussion. The House is scheduled to pass the bill on Oct. 14, 2008, after it is debated by the consultative body (Bamus).
But critics claim serious problems with the bill remain unresolved despite the large number of changes made since the draft law was first introduced in 2006 as the Pornography and Indecent Acts Bill.
"We reject the current bill although it is very different from the original version that was first introduced. We need to do a simulation to determine whether it will in fact create more problems than it solves," legislator Ganjar Pranowo of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) said.
He said the bill did not distinguish between children and adults, between models and producers and distributors, or between private domains and public spaces.
The bill also duplicates other laws regulating the same issues, including the Criminal Code, the child protection law and the cyber law, he said.
The definition of pornography used in the bill encompasses activities such as artwork and poetry, which could lead to different interpretations by different groups or individuals.
"Pornography is any man-made work that includes sexual materials in the form of drawings, sketches, illustrations, photographs, text, sound, moving pictures, animation, cartoons, poetry, conversation, or any other form of communicative message," reads Article 1 of the bill, a copy of which was obtained by The Jakarta Post.
"It also can be shown through the media to the public; it can arouse lust and lead to the violation of normative values within society; and it can also cause the development of pornographic acts within society."
The Pro-Woman Working Group on the bill said the draft law generalized all forms of pornography based on a free interpretation of morality and failed to specify child pornography. The bill also failed to differentiate among age groups in their access to pornography, it said.
The group suggested that adults (older than 21 years) should be allowed to have private access to pornography, while youths (18-21 years) and minors (below 18) should not be allowed access.
"It is the access to pornography that should be regulated, with the punishment focused on the industry, such as the owners, founders and distributors rather than the models (actors)," it said. Articles 9 and 11, which regulate the actors and models, criminalize the victims, the group said.
Setara Institute chairman Hendardi pointed to the danger of Article 21 of the bill, which allows any groups or individuals within society to take part in preventive action. "The article will justify hard-liners in taking the law into their own hands, threatening violence against certain groups," he said.
Sidharto Danusubroto, another PDI-P legislator, said pluralism would be under threat should further changes not be made to the bill, as it currently allowed certain groups to force their ideology onto others.
But Mahfudz Siddiq, chairman of the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) faction in the House, said the law was urgently needed because pornography was too widely available. The PKS and other Islamist organizations, such as the Indonesian Ulema Council, are staunch supporters of the pornography bill.