Jakarta – The flawed state secrecy bill still being deliberated at the House of Representatives could deny the public the right to get important information and alarm the control function of the House and the mass media, a panel of experts warn.
Speaking at a press conference Sunday, legal expert Irmanputra Sidin and deputy director for the Science and Aesthetics and Technology Foundation Agus Sudibyo called on the House to drop the "important bill" and leave it to the next House, despite its deliberation having cost much money and a lot of time.
The bill has also met with strong opposition from an alliance of civil society groups, including the Independent Journalists' Association (AJI), because of its contentious substance.
Irmanputra said he was against the bill's threat to punish individuals and private institutions possessing information considered confidential or secret.
"If the bill is passed into law, then every single journalist, legislator or even a vice president himself can be considered in violation of the law once they gain any information on state secrets," he said.
"They do not need to publish the confidential information to the public; just by being aware of such information is enough for a criminal charge, according to the bill."
He added that even though the bill was initially drafted for "a good purpose", the flawed clause could potentially be exploited by the state to cover up corrupt and criminal activities within the government.
"The prime victims of the bill, if it is passed into law, are the legislators themselves in doing their job. It will also deprive the House of its inquiry right to investigate any violations allegedly involving the government or its officials," Irmanputra said.
What was really worrying, he went on, was that most legislators were unaware about such legal consequences, including the possible annulment of the House's authority, because they were too busy with the elections.
The bill also gives the government maximum flexibility in defining what is secret, contrary to the newly endorsed law on the free flow of information.
"That means the scope of 'confidential information' does not only cover defense, intelligence, foreign affairs and diplomatic functions, but also other information regarding institutions, bureaucrats and so on," he said.
"With that in mind, it's very possible for any state institution in future to claim any information as 'confidential', regardless of the importance and effect it may have on the public. This goes completely against the spirit of the free flow of information law."
The law stipulates all public institutions, both state and private, must announce important information that could potentially harm the public at least once every six months.
Agus also said another contentious issue was that the bill failed to distinguish between secret information and public information.
"In other countries, like the United States, public interests always stand above any confidential information," he said.
"So if any secret information is considered to have a potentially great effect on the public, then it should be made open and accessible."
Both Agus and Irmanputra said they realized the importance of having a law on state secrecy, but added it would be better to delay the ratification of the bill because of the current situation within the House.
Djoko Susilo, a member of the House's Commission I on defense, information, military and foreign affairs deliberating the bill, said
his commission would likely drop the bill and leave it to the next House because it did not have sufficient time to complete the deliberation despite its importance to the public. (hdt)