Welcome Guest   |  Login   |   Signup
JG Logo
Fri, May 25, 2012
Archive Search

Homemade Porn for Private Use Is Legal
Arientha Primanita | April 26, 2011

Share This Page
103
11
0
23
Share with google+ :


Post a comment
Please login to post comment

Comments

DrDez
9:24pm Apr 27, 2011

Devine

This is different. If the supreme court rules a release/reduction then there is noone required to do anything other than unlock his cell. In the Bogor case (still unresolved) the Governor et el still weild the islamic power like a hammer and have provincial laws to hide behind

I have read the ruling - it is pretty clear and should pave the way for an early release. As I recall he was not found guilty of distributing it just facilitating the distribution by actually making it (which we now see is not illegal) - question whys Hatta was never prosecuted and others of course aside - this should (ha) mean his verdict was unsafe. It was perhaps no coincidence that the appeal was turned down the day before the law was changed

We can only hope for him.

PLUS letting him go would be another signal to the hardliners that their influence was declining - however as with banning the Ahamdiayah (still unresolved) keeping Ariel locked up is a signal of the opposite


Valkyrie
5:29pm Apr 27, 2011

Baggersee:

I think you're off track here. Ariel was unfortunate. The point is, they needed a scapegoat to convey their message to the masses.

You know why I said "unfortunate?" It's because he was very popular.

Call it what you like,but I certainly feel that it was a set up. And like what DrDez mentioned......lots of black gold $$$$$ were made available for this. scenario.

Money was NEVER an issue. Remember, this is "opposite land."

devine
5:01pm Apr 27, 2011

DrDez. My guess is that it wont change anything for Ariel. The Supreme Court did not do any changes to the law. And we know from Bogor that it is "fashionable" to ignore anything from the Supreme Court...

DrDez
4:31pm Apr 27, 2011

Bagger

The Saudi funding has deeper pockets than most in Indonesia. Their influence on religious, political, cultural and social attitudes is massive

Ariel and uncle Tom Cobbly couldn't have paid enough.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will take notice of the Constitutional Courts ruling yesterday and when his appeal is heard will at the very least cut his sentance

baggersee
2:18pm Apr 27, 2011

It is not about religion, it is about money! Ariel should have paid more!

The verdict is in: making your own sex video is not illegal.

In a landmark ruling on Tuesday, the Constitutional Court threw out a request for a judicial review of the 2008 Anti-Pornography Law, which sought an amendment to criminalize the filming of sex videos for private use.

Chief Justice Mahfud M.D., in rejecting the request for a review filed by controversial lawyer Farhat Abbas, said: “The plaintiffs’ argument does not have a legal basis.”

Article 4 of the law bans people from producing pornographic material, while Article 6 prohibits people from storing or broadcasting it. However, Farhat’s camp has said supplementary explanations of the law exclude materials “for personal use and interest.”

“If pornography is for ‘personal use,’ the actor might be seen as a victim [when material is distributed without consent], when in fact pornography exists because of the actors in the first place,” Muhammad Burhanuddin, one of Farhat’s lawyers, had argued.

However, Justice Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi said that while the court agreed with the plaintiffs that pornography violated norms of decency if made public, the point here was that a homemade video for private use was not meant to be made public.

“If something containing pornographic elements is used solely for one’s self, it doesn’t violate public decency or disturb public order,” he said.

He added that the court considered Articles 4 and 6 constitutional. “The court believes there is no unconstitutionality or contradiction here, as long as the material in question is for one’s own use,” Fadlil stressed.

Farhat and his camp sought the judicial review in the wake of the celebrity sex video scandal involving Nazril “Ariel” Irham, the frontman for the band Peterpan.

The videos appeared on the Internet last year. One allegedly showed Ariel with his girlfriend, Luna Maya, while another was said to show him with TV presenter Cut Tari.

Ariel has been sentenced to three and a half years in prison on a charge of distributing pornography, not for making the films, although he insists he did not upload the videos to the Internet.

Anwar Sadat, a representative for the plaintiffs, said that while the request for the judicial review had been rejected, the two women in the Ariel case should still be held accountable.

“The makers of sex videos must also be punished,” he said. “We know that Ariel has been sentenced to prison, but what about Luna Maya and Cut Tari?”

However, criminal law expert Edi Hiariej, from Yogyakarta’s Gadjah Mada University, has said the supplementary explanations to the law excluding material for personal use were the reason police would not be able to charge Ariel, Luna or Cut Tari under the pornography law.

Anwar said he was not disappointed with the Constitutional Court’s ruling but would examine the pornography law again thoroughly.

“We’ll just accept the ruling and make revisions for another request for a judicial review that we’ll file in the future,” he said.
He declined to say when the group would file the new request.