Prita Mulyasari to Appeal Ruling for Internet Defamation Retrial

archive search

Last updated at 6:31 AM. Saturday 20 March 2010

Share this page

Go to comments August 04, 2009

Kinanti Pinta Karana

Prita Mulyasari (Photo: Safir Makki, JG)

Prita Mulyasari to Appeal Ruling for Internet Defamation Retrial

A lawyer for Prita Mulyasari said on Tuesday that he will lodge a Supreme Court appeal next week against the Banten High Court’s decision to order a retrial of the mother-of-two’s defamation case. Meanwhile, a law expert has said that summoning a psychiatrist to the witness stand could be Prita’s best hope.

Lawyer Slamet Juwono said that the Supreme Court appeal was expected to delay the retrial at Tangerang District Court until the higher court had delivered its verdict.

Prita was taken to court for sending an e-mail message to friends criticizing her treatment at the Omni International Hospital in Tangerang, Banten. Last month, the Tangerang District Court threw out the defamation charge against Prita, but a challenge from prosecutors could see her facing the court again.

Ronny, an expert in telecommunications law from Makassar’s Atmajaya University, said that Prita should have anticipated the prosecutors’ challenge, and subsequent call for a retrial, because the preliminary verdict did not have a strong legal base. But he said that summoning a psychiatrist to the witness stand could be Prita’s best hope.

“A psychiatrist will be able to explain Prita’s mental condition when she wrote the email,” Ronny said. “Prita was under a lot stress, she was worried about her life and that’s why she wrote the email — but she will need an expert to say it.”

The district court threw out Prita’s case because it was based on the Electronic Transaction and Information Law, which the court said would not come into effect until April 2010. But Ronny said this preliminary verdict was “questionable.”

“According to Article 54 of Electronic Transaction and Information Law, the law came into effect in April 2008,” he said.

Ronny added that it is necessary for Prita to get a fixed legal decision by going through the retrial.

The Attorney General’s Office last Friday praised the decision by the Banten High Court to retry the case as a “wise and thoughtful step.”

AGO spokesman Jasman Panjaitan said that a retrial by the district court would lend a firm legal base for Prita.

“Prita is not officially free yet. The district court only rejected the prosecutors’ charges against Prita,” he said. “Prita needs to know if her action [sending the e-mail] was defamatory or not.

“I think a retrial will accommodate Prita’s need for a fixed verdict and also the public’s need, which is represented by the prosecutors,” he added.

Prita’s case, which saw the mother of two spend three weeks in jail, led to widespread public outrage.

Harsh Defamation Laws Harm Free Speech in Indonesia

9:39 PM 21/07/2009

Slander and Unity: The Year Online in Indonesia

3:50 PM 29/12/2009

Making a Date With an Indonesian Debate

5:40 PM 29/11/2009

What Happens to You Today Could Make It to the Pages of ‘A Day on the Planet’

5:42 PM 08/09/2009

Prita Mulyasari Tries To End Her Defamation Trial Saga

7:43 PM 10/08/2009

Comments

Valkyrie

5:38 AM August 6, 2009

Someone's working real hard to "suppress" freedom of expression via the internet.

We must not allow this to take place.

www.Rexxfield.com

11:12 PM August 5, 2009

I know firsthand how anguishing it can be to attacked by an Internet smear campaign, in fact, helping victims of Internet libel is what I do for a living as a result of what I learned through my own experiences. I had a business, relationships, and career destroyed as a result. However, that was because the libelous postings were on the Internet for all to see at all times.

I don't know if the defendant in this case did make libelous comments by email message, to be libelous in most jurisdictions she would need to have made factual allegations that are not true. Either way, an email message has a very limited readership, furthermore, it's just a fleeting message unlike an Internet webpage posting. I have not seen the message, I do not know the circumstances, as such I cannot comment either way on the guilt or innocence of the defendant. However, what I can say is that the the plaintiff in this case made a huge strategic error by making such a big deal about it. Really, how many people will have read this e-mail as a result of all this commotion? Potentially millions, even if they don't get to read the e-mail, millions of people will be outraged by the reaction of the hospital.

Whereas, had the plaintiff just written off the knowledge to an emotional and disappointed patient, the world would've kept going for them.

This type of situation has been called "the Streisand Effect". Barbara Streisand once filed suit against a private individual who had posted photographs of many properties on the Internet, hers was included. If I recall correctly, she filed suit for about $50 million. The community was so incredulous that e-mails, webpages, and just general discussions about the issue flamed out of control.

rasul

10:17 AM August 5, 2009

Why it is so quick for the police and the court to get Prita to justice (even in a rare and gray case like that) if something big corporation felt disappointed with her, why in the same time there are a lot of importand cases for example the one which damage people hardly like what is still happening in Porong, Central Java, which is still unsolved until today. It is really the things that should be used as a parameter that Justice is still not treated equal in this republic. Any reformer from the inside institutions that deal with the case should, of course, see what makes that instituions respond it abnormally quick to get the case done in the court.