The highly divisive 2008 Anti-Pornography Law will be back in the Constitutional Court today. But unlike the previous judicial reviews that sought to annul the controversial law, or at least parts of it, this time the applicant wants the court to strengthen it.
Controversial lawyer Farhat Abbas said he had been motivated by the celebrity sex video scandal involving Nazril “Ariel” Irham, Luna Maya and Cut Tari to seek the judicial review.
Article 4 of the law bans people from producing pornographic material, while Article 6 prohibits people from storing or broadcasting it. However, supplementary explanations to the law exclude materials “for personal use and interest.”
This is what Farhat, who last month lodged a complaint with police over the videos, wants the court to review, because he claims the supplementary explanations contradict the true meaning of the articles.
“If pornography is for ‘personal use,’ the actor might be seen as a victim, when in fact pornography exists because of the actors themselves,” said Burhanuddin, Farhat’s lawyer.
The supplementary explanation has been cited by criminal law expert Edi Hiariej, from Yogyakarta’s Gadjah Mada University, as the reason why police should not be able to charge Ariel, Luna and Cut Tari under the Anti-Pornography Law.
“So the controversy over the personal use issue, such as in the Ariel and Luna Maya case, made them appear as if they were the victims,” Burhanuddin said.
“But we consider them as the actors who produced pornographic materials and engaged in sexual relations outside of marriage. It is against morality.”
He added that though Indonesian law was not based on religion, Indonesia, as a country, was still very religious.
“In the context of pornography, there should be no exception, even for husband and wife. These are the seeds of the eventual destruction of morality,” he said.
Asked why Farhat had taken it upon himself to rewrite the law books, Burhanuddin said his client ran an NGO that paid special attention to legal cases involving issues of morality, such as pornography.
The controversial 34-year-old Farhat has represented clients such as teenage celebrity model Manohara Odelia Pinot and corruption suspects. He also sought to become the next chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) but was disqualified from the running for being outside the age requirements.
Andy Yentriyani, from the National Commission on Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan), said Farhat was going too far.
“Farhat should be careful with what he says as this could have big implications for the country,” she said.
“If that portion [supplementary explanations] is annulled, the country better be ready for the fallout. Should we then conduct door-to-door raids to look at cellphones?
“The porn law has been problematic from the start as legislators were unable to grasp the complexity of pornography. Pros and cons will always appear as it is something that people have multiple views on.”
The Anti-Pornography Law has been heard by the Constitutional Court before. In March, a year after it began hearing judicial review requests filed by 47 applicants ranging from representatives of youth groups and churches to housewives, women’s activists and legal aid foundations, the court ruled to maintain the law.
The court ruling, however, failed to end the debate over the law, which activists say does little to solve the proliferation of pornography in the country.
On Monday, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono told the Indonesian Council of Ulema (MUI) that he was ashamed by the widespread distribution of the celebrity sex videos, and sought the help of the council in addressing the problem.
