This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/17/schapelle-corby-should-not-give-interviews

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Schapelle Corby should not give interviews. To do so would be foolhardy Schapelle Corby should not give interviews. To do so would be foolhardy
(7 months later)
Like most Like most developing countries, Indonesia has a legal system beset with problems, including both low levels of skill among many legal officials and high levels of corruption. This has been acknowledged by Soeharto and every president of Indonesia since - including the incumbent, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono - and by every chief justice appointed during that time.
developing countries, Indonesia has a legal system beset with problems, But this does not mean that it is impossible to obtain fair treatment. In fact, there are signs that Indonesia’s legal system may be slowly improving, even if there is still a long way to go. The treatment of Schapelle Corby is a case in point. Despite the often vicious criticism Indonesian officials have received from Australians over the decade since Corby’s arrest, they have, in fact, generally handled her case in reasonable and straightforward fashion, and in compliance with Indonesian law.
including both low levels of skill among many legal officials and high levels They have also not singled Corby out for harsh or punitive treatment. Her original sentence of 20 years was very heavy by Australian standards, but at Indonesian law she could have received death for smuggling over 4.1kg of marijuana.
of corruption. This has been acknowledged by Soeharto and every president of The media frenzy that has accompanied her case led to a storm of abuse of Indonesia (including the often-repeated but factually incorrect claim that it has no presumption of innocence). Corby’s sentence was nonetheless cut two years by remissions and five years by clemency granted by president Yudhoyono, despite significant political criticism.
Indonesia since - including the incumbent, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono - and by Now that same system has granted Corby parole, because, as the Indonesian minister for justice and human rights, Amir Syamsuddin, says, that is the law – ministerial regulations entitle prisoners to parole after serving two-thirds of their sentence, provided they meet various conditions.
every chief justice appointed during that time. But as his deputy minister, Denny Indrayana, has added, parole is not early release, and if Corby wants to enjoy the benefits of what is effectively a form of conditional “island detention” on Bali, she will have to comply with two sets of conditions imposed by Indonesian law. Indrayana has made it clear that if she gives media interviews from her Seminyak villa, she will likely breach those conditions, and find herself back in jail – because that is the law.
But this The first set of conditions are parole rules that Indonesian justice ministry officials issued specifically for her. According to the media, these include good behavior and reporting periodically to officials in Bali, wearing appropriate attire.
does not mean that it is impossible to obtain fair treatment. In fact, there are signs that Indonesia’s The second set are general conditions imposed upon all parolees by justice minister regulations. Under these, the director general of prisons can revoke her parole if she breaks the law, if there are indications that the crime is repeated, if she fails to report to officials three consecutive times, if she does not report a change of address or fails to follow the development program stipulated by prison officials.
legal system may be slowly improving, even if there is still a long way to go. Most significant, however, is the condition that she not menimbulkan keresahan (“cause unrest”) in the community. Menimbulkan is a very broad term, encompassing not only acts that lead to intended results but also those that simply lead to or give rise to them. Keresahan is also a broad term that refers to minor disruptions, meaning mere restlessness, upset or frustration. It is therefore quite possible that if Corby causes any kind of disruption to the community, whether local or wider, intentionally or not – she could be seen to breach this condition.
The treatment of Schapelle Corby is a case in point. Despite the often vicious Rightly or wrongly, the release of the woman they call “ganja Queen” has drawn the ire of Indonesian politicians and anti-narcotics groups, and many Indonesians appear concerned that she has received special treatment. An interview might therefore provoke disruption, particularly if Corby maintains her innocence and attacks the Indonesian justice system.
criticism Indonesian officials have received from Australians over the decade This is why deputy minister Indrayana and officials in Bali have publicly warned Corby that if she does the interview, she will breach parole. She could ignore Indrayana’s advice and give an interview, hoping that it will not cause keresahaan, but that would be foolhardy. The director general of prisons gets to decide whether she has caused keresahan and any decision to revoke her parole would likely be unilateral and not subject to challenge in court. She would then land back in jail to serve out the rest of her sentence with no possibility of further remission.
since Corby’s arrest, they have, in fact, generally handled her case in Worse, taking this risk will likely bring little or no reward. Much attention has focused upon whether Australian law will allow Corby to keep the proceeds of any interview. However, Indonesia also has laws that appear to have similar effect, although they are different in their operation.
reasonable and straightforward fashion, and in compliance with Indonesian law. Professor of international law Hikmahanto Juwana, former dean of the University of Indonesia Law Faculty, gave a press conference in Jakarta this week in which he claimed that the Indonesian state would be entitled to any money Corby made while on parole. This is because Corby is still officially a prisoner, and any money prisoners earn from providing services is classified as “non-tax state income” under government regulations. Juwana argued that providing interviews or even exclusive photographs would constitute such services, and all proceeds would have to be surrendered to the state.
They have Corby now needs to choose between the Australian media circus and Indonesian law. The prospect of a lucrative paid interview leaves Corby skating on very thin ice, for what is likely to be very little reward, if any, and the real possibility of a great deal of pain.
also not singled Corby out for harsh or punitive treatment. Her original
sentence of 20 years was very heavy by Australian standards, but at Indonesian
law she could have received death for smuggling over 4.1kg of
marijuana.
The media
frenzy that has accompanied her case led to a storm of abuse of Indonesia (including
the often-repeated but factually incorrect claim that it has no presumption of
innocence). Corby’s sentence was nonetheless cut two years by remissions and five
years by clemency granted by president Yudhoyono, despite significant political
criticism.
Now that
same system has granted Corby parole, because, as the Indonesian minister for justice
and human rights, Amir Syamsuddin, says, that is the law – ministerial
regulations entitle prisoners to parole after serving two-thirds of their
sentence, provided they meet various conditions.
But as his
deputy minister, Denny Indrayana, has added, parole is not early release, and
if Corby wants to enjoy the benefits of what is effectively a form of
conditional “island detention” on Bali, she will have to comply with two sets
of conditions imposed by Indonesian law. Indrayana has made it clear that if
she gives media interviews from her Seminyak villa, she
will likely breach those conditions, and find herself back in jail – because
that is the law.
The first
set of conditions are parole rules that Indonesian justice ministry officials
issued specifically for her. According to the media, these include good
behavior and reporting periodically to officials in Bali, wearing appropriate
attire.
The second
set are general conditions imposed upon all parolees by justice minister
regulations. Under these, the director general of prisons can revoke her
parole if she breaks the law, if there are indications that the crime is
repeated, if she fails to report to officials three consecutive times, if she does not
report a change of address or fails to follow the development program
stipulated by prison officials.
Most
significant, however, is the condition that she not menimbulkan keresahan (“cause unrest”) in the community. Menimbulkan is a very
broad term, encompassing not only acts that lead to intended results but also
those that simply lead to or give rise to them. Keresahan is also a broad
term that refers to minor disruptions, meaning mere restlessness, upset or frustration. It is
therefore quite possible that if Corby causes any kind of disruption to the
community, whether local or wider, intentionally or not – she could be seen to
breach this condition.
Rightly or
wrongly, the release of the woman they call “ganja Queen” has drawn the ire of
Indonesian politicians and anti-narcotics groups, and many Indonesians appear
concerned that she has received special treatment. An interview might therefore provoke disruption,
particularly if Corby maintains her innocence and attacks the Indonesian
justice system.
This is why
deputy minister Indrayana and officials in Bali have publicly warned Corby that
if she does the interview, she will breach parole. She could ignore Indrayana’s
advice and give an interview, hoping that it will not cause keresahaan, but that would be foolhardy. The
director general of prisons gets to decide whether she has caused keresahan
and any decision to revoke her parole would likely be unilateral and not
subject to challenge in court. She would then land back in jail to serve out
the rest of her sentence with no possibility of further remission.
Worse,
taking this risk will likely bring little or no reward. Much attention has
focused upon whether Australian law will allow Corby to keep the proceeds of
any interview. However, Indonesia also has laws that appear to have similar
effect, although they are different in their operation.
Professor
of international law Hikmahanto Juwana, former dean of the University of
Indonesia Law Faculty, gave a press conference in Jakarta this week in which he
claimed that the Indonesian state would be entitled to any money Corby made
while on parole. This is
because Corby is still officially a prisoner, and any money prisoners earn from
providing services is classified as “non-tax state income” under government
regulations. Juwana argued that providing interviews or even
exclusive photographs would constitute such services, and all proceeds would
have to be surrendered to the state.
Corby now
needs to choose between the Australian media circus and Indonesian law. The
prospect of a lucrative paid interview leaves Corby skating on very thin ice,
for what is likely to be very little reward, if any, and the real possibility
of a great deal of pain.