Print

Mail

wiki links

Indonesia stands firm on militants despite verdict

An Indonesian court's decision to reject a key charge against radical cleric Abu Bakar Bashir reflects the prosecution's weakness, not political meddling or a wobbly resolve to stamp out militant Islam, analysts said.

The trial of Bashir on treason charges for using his alleged leadership of the Jemaah Islamiah network to overthrow the secular government of the world's most populous Muslim nation had been seen as a litmus test for Indonesia.

"In Indonesia, the courts have traditionally not been independent, and have been accountable to the state. But that is starting to change," said Zachary Abuza, a counter-terrorism expert at Simmons College in the US.

"I still think Bashir is, no doubt, the spiritual leader of the organization. But the prosecution of the case was abysmal."

Jemaah Islamiah has been blamed for a string of attacks across Southeast Asia, including last month's blast at the luxury JW Marriott Hotel in Jakarta and the Bali bombs that killed 202 people, almost half of them Australians.

The judges' ruling that the preacher was involved in treason -- but not necessarily the leader of Jemaah Islamiah -- left many disappointed, but few pointing fingers.

"On the one hand I'm pleased the Indonesian justice process appears to have worked. He's been found guilty of certain offences, he's been given a jail term -- that's good," Australian Prime Minister John Howard told Australian radio yesterday.

"On the other hand, many of us here in Australia believe that he was at least the spiritual leader of JI and therefore at least knew about the attack in Bali. We're disappointed that he wasn't convicted on that and didn't get a longer sentence."

The response from Washington was also muted.

Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda responded angrily when reporters asked him if Jakarta was just paying lip service to fighting terrorism.

"We've proven our ability in handling, investigating, arresting and processing those who are suspected of being involved in terrorism cases, including in the Bali bombings and the Marriott bombing," Wirajuda said.

Analysts said prosecution reliance solely on often conflicting testimony of witnesses, many of whom have spent months in Singaporean and Indonesian jails awaiting trials of their own, left the case weak.

"I think that what the judges have done is to tell the prosecution you have not proved guilt beyond any doubt, which is one of the foundations of judgments in Western democracies," said Amin Saikal, director of the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies at the Australian National University.

The five judges in their verdict relied almost solely on Bashir's association with key JI figures in order to impose any sentence at all, and described his sermons as inflammatory.

"There was always doubt about the witnesses, or building a case just on witness testimony and if witnesses from outside, testifying from outside the country is very credible," Saikal said, referring to video testimony from Singapore and Malaysia.

Analysts said there was little evidence Jakarta was flagging in its resolve to eradicate extremist groups.

"I do think that the Indonesian government is serious about fighting terrorism. I really think they deserve credit," said Robert Broadfoot, director of the Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy.

"The legal system in Indonesia is still one of the problems that all the foreign investors and everyone else is looking at, and I'm looking at this more from the perspective of the quality of the legal system," he said.

"That's a real issue," he added.
This story has been viewed 2843 times.