A decision by Indonesia's top court to award ex-dictator Suharto millions of dollars in a defamation suit calls the judiciary's integrity into question and imperils press freedom, activists and analysts warned on Tuesday.
The Supreme Court ordered US-based Time magazine to pay US$106 million in damages to Suharto on Monday for publishing an article in 1999 that alleged the former president squirrelled away billions of dollars abroad.
Time said in its story that it had traced some US$15 billion in wealth accumulated by Suharto and his six children following a four-month investigation across 11 countries.
This allegedly included US$9 billion in cash transferred from a Swiss to an Austrian bank shortly after Suharto stepped down in May 1998.
The court also ruled that Time must apologize to 86-year-old Suharto, who has never stood trial over persistent allegations of massive corruption during his 32-year rule.
The ruling showed the Supreme Court was out of touch with "the new situation now prevailing in Indonesia," said Amiruddin, a campaign coordinator for Elsham, a private policy institute.
Suharto's downfall ushered in an era of reform to the world's fourth most populous nation, but many have been disappointed over the pace of change in some areas -- such as the judiciary, where Suharto's shadow still looms large.
"We can only surmise that the characteristics of many of the Supreme Court judges have not changed from, let us say, 10 years ago. They continue to put Suharto on a pedestal, as he if he was a god," Amiruddin said. "The only way [to instigate change] is to inject young blood into that institution."
Fadjroel Rachman, who heads an Indonesian research group working to uncover Suharto's crimes, said he feared the "scandalous" decision may color other court action underway against Suharto and his youngest son, Tommy.
State prosecutors are bringing a civil suit against Suharto over alleged corruption related to some foundations he chaired. They are seeking US$1.5 billion in returned assets and damages.
Tommy, meanwhile, is facing criminal and civil graft-related suits.
"The Supreme Court is being used to save corruptors ... The individuals in the Supreme Court behind this case are Suharto's proteges," Rachman said.
He noted that head judge Bagir Manan, who was on the three-judge panel ruling in Suharto's favor, had cut a jail term Tommy was serving for ordering the murder of a judge.
Manan was also on a panel that quashed the conviction of a pilot for murdering a high-profile activist critical of Suharto-era abuses.
"This is suspicious," Rachman said.
Supreme Court judges -- at most, 60 -- are selected by a judicial commission and approved by parliament. They retain their post until retirement.
Gunawan Muhammad, former editor of the Tempo weekly news magazine, said that the impact of the decision was to cast "the Supreme Court itself in a bad light," adding that it was also a worrying move for press freedom.
Frans Hendra Winata, a member of the national commission of law, described the ruling as a significant setback for a formerly shackled press which has flourished since Suharto's demise.
The press "will not be able to help efforts to eradicate corruption and with this verdict, it is now clear on whose side the Supreme Court is ... The press will now think twice before reporting on corruption," he said.
Julia Fromholz from Human Rights First, a New York-based organization, said the decision stood in stark contrast to the failure to bring rights cases from Suharto's era to trial.
"The courts have long failed to hold past and current officials accountable for their actions, but this decision even further highlights the persistence of impunity in Indonesia," she said.
In a meeting with Haitian Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Victor Harvel Jean-Baptiste on Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) vowed to continue providing aid to Haiti. Taiwan supports Haiti with development in areas such as agriculture, healthcare and education through initiatives run by the Taiwan International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF). The nation it has established itself as a responsible, peaceful and innovative actor committed to global cooperation, Jean-Baptiste said. Testimonies such as this give Taiwan a voice in the global community, where it often goes unheard. Taiwan’s reception in Haiti also contrasts with how China has been perceived in countries in the region
The world has become less predictable, less rules-based, and more shaped by the impulses of strongmen and short-term dealmaking. Nowhere is this more consequential than in East Asia, where the fate of democratic Taiwan hinges on how global powers manage — or mismanage — tensions with an increasingly assertive China. The return of Donald Trump to the White House has deepened the global uncertainty, with his erratic, highly personalized foreign-policy approach unsettling allies and adversaries alike. Trump appears to treat foreign policy like a reality show. Yet, paradoxically, the global unpredictability may offer Taiwan unexpected deterrence. For China, the risk of provoking the
On April 13, I stood in Nanan (南安), a Bunun village in southern Hualien County’s Jhuosi Township (卓溪), absorbing lessons from elders who spoke of the forest not as backdrop, but as living presence — relational, sacred and full of spirit. I was there with fellow international students from National Dong Hwa University (NDHU) participating in a field trip that would become one of the most powerful educational experiences of my life. Ten days later, a news report in the Taipei Times shattered the spell: “Formosan black bear shot and euthanized in Hualien” (April 23, page 2). A tagged bear, previously released
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote