Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a quotation record.
00:00:00Because every story has more than one legal point of view, this
00:00:03law is not just about arresting people. This
00:00:07is a gamble for our survival as a nation to hear and test
00:00:10statements that cover both sides every Wednesday
00:00:16that those who live at 9
00:00:17was committed PM. This Saturday, for more than a decade, women around
00:00:21the world have had the right to vote, but the struggle
00:00:25for equality is not over. Even though more and more women
00:00:28are leading countries.
00:01:02the actions of the defendants that
00:01:23earlier, is actually
00:01:56Viewers, you are back watching Metro TV breaking news and this time
00:02:05writing, stamps. That's what
00:02:14arriving at the East Jakarta District Court building at around
00:02:170:30 Indonesian time.
00:02:28indictment. Well, the defamation
00:02:39TNI and Polri personnel were guarding the East Jakarta District Court. Yes, they will listen
00:02:43later. later
00:02:47bring
00:02:47or do they support each other, bring
00:02:51and to find out more about Joko
00:02:55Widodo testifying at Roy
00:02:58Tiva's trial today. We have joined with Mr. Abdul Fikar
00:03:02Hajar, a criminal law expert. Mr. Fikar, good morning.
00:03:05Good morning. Sir, Mr.
00:03:09Fikar, how important is
00:03:12Jokowi's direct presence
00:03:14cases, the victim witness as the reporter in this case?
00:03:16Yes, it is very
00:03:19important, because
00:03:22what is being tried here
00:03:25is defamation. defamation.
00:03:29Defamation is a complaint offense.
00:03:32Although defamation is actually
00:03:36more of a civil matter, actually,
00:03:40because the person who is harmed
00:03:42or any sentence that is an individual.
00:03:44But
00:03:47by the legal world,
00:03:51there is a public interest that must be protected,
00:03:54yes. If someone defames someone else and is not
00:03:58prosecuted, then... yes, this will become a habit for
00:04:02someone to commit a crime. That's why
00:04:05it's
00:04:08ask for placed as a criminal article as a complaint offense.
00:04:10A complaint offense means an offense or a crime
00:04:14that is only processed if a complaint is filed.
00:04:18Only then is the criminal case processed,
00:04:22anything done by the community but if no complaint is filed, it is not processed, because if you want to, if you want to
00:04:25look at everyday life, for example, on social media or
00:04:28in other forums, people insult each other,
00:04:31people defame each other,
00:04:34my submission and so on, that is something common. Well,
00:04:37that's why this is
00:04:40a new
00:04:42history,
00:04:45right? That there is a former public official,
00:04:48a former president, who chooses to pursue
00:04:52this case, even though on the other hand, there are, for example,
00:04:56other public officials, such as constitutional
00:04:59court judges... Arsul Arsul, when he was
00:05:02accused of having a fake diploma and never having gone to school, he simply
00:05:06issued a press release. A press release was shown to
00:05:09the press, what, proof
00:05:12of his diploma, it was over. People no longer slandered him by saying that he had
00:05:16a fake diploma and so on, but Mr. Jokowi chose to do this
00:05:20in court, choosing to prove it in court.
00:05:23That's why
00:05:27are considered to have defamed him are brought to
00:05:30court, and then Mr. Jokowi will prove in
00:05:33court that here is
00:05:37my diploma, here is that I have
00:05:40been to school and so on. That's
00:05:42what happened. But as I also said
00:05:46many times,
00:05:50when someone brings evidence to court,
00:05:53there are other consequences, yes. The other
00:05:57consequence is that there is a statement that is considered true
00:06:00and not true. That's why if someone gives
00:06:04false testimony in court, they can be reported for giving false testimony,
00:06:08and can also be prosecuted criminally. So that's one thing. Second,
00:06:12the statement or
00:06:15evidence that he brings to court
00:06:18must correlate or must be supported by
00:06:22other evidence, by other witness statements, by
00:06:26other written evidence. So it must be synchronized with
00:06:30other evidence. Well, that's also a risk, right? That is, when we
00:06:33decide to prove something in
00:06:37court, then it must also be calculated,
00:06:40right? Is it correlated with... what, other
00:06:43evidence or with other witness testimony? Well, that's what will
00:06:46determine it. Because if it's not
00:06:49correlated, it will stand alone. Well, in
00:06:52criminal law, the testimony of one witness
00:06:56is not considered testimony, it is considered non-existent. One
00:06:59witness is not a witness, that's the term. Well, that's what
00:07:03will happen. Well, that's why I said earlier, there are
00:07:06consequences, both legally and
00:07:09sociologically, right? When people
00:07:13choose the court forum to prove something,
00:07:17like that, ma'am. Hmm, Mr. Fikar, what
00:07:20is currently being discussed by the public
00:07:23regarding whether Jokowi will bring his original diploma
00:07:27to the trial, how
00:07:29important is the original physical document in this case,
00:07:33sir?
00:07:35Okay, yes, it goes back to the defamation
00:07:40that is being accused
00:07:42is because these people, these defendants, said
00:07:46that Mr. Jokowi's diploma was fake, right? That's right,
00:07:49it's considered to defame Mr.
00:07:52Jokowi, what, his diploma has
00:07:55not been proven that he actually has a diploma and so on. Well,
00:07:59those are the sentences that are then used as the basis to
00:08:02prosecute criminally by the state, in this case the public prosecutor,
00:08:06against these perpetrators. Well, that's why it is important
00:08:09for Mr. Jokowi to be present. The presence of
00:08:12the diploma being brought,
00:08:16that is important. Not to mention, if we what,
00:08:19pull it back to the general criminal
00:08:23case. Well, in general criminal
00:08:26should be examined first, because the indictment
00:08:29is built, or the suspicion
00:08:33or indictment against the perpetrators is built on
00:08:36the basis of the statement or report from the victim
00:08:40that there was defamation of his good name.
00:08:42Well, he should be examined first, then other evidence
00:08:46or statements from expert witnesses and other
00:08:49written evidence should be continued to
00:08:52support, what, the first evidence. That's how the process should be,
00:08:56yes. But what, it also
00:09:00doesn't invalidate it, if he is processed and heard
00:09:03at a time
00:09:07that is not the first time, what's important is that there is evidence.
00:09:10It's just that when the
00:09:13judge makes a decision, that decision is actually a conclusion,
00:09:16a conclusion from the facts of the trial.
00:09:19Well, in the
00:09:22laws and regulations and in the
00:09:26theory of legal science, a decision by
00:09:30a judge is based on the facts that occurred in
00:09:32the trial, then which creates
00:09:35certainty for the judge that the
00:09:38facts are indeed true or false, for example, only then does he
00:09:42draw a conclusion and make a decision, whether the decision
00:09:46is proven or not proven. Well, that's how the process
00:09:49is. Well, that's why it is important
00:09:52to prove that the
00:09:55diploma that was declared fake by the defendants
00:09:59is proven in court, like that, ma'am.
00:10:02Yes, Mr. Fikar, that's interesting, meaning that this original diploma
00:10:05is very important to be shown today,
00:10:08and we also want to know, sir, how much is this
00:10:13related to the original diploma that will be shown,
00:10:17the percentage to influence the strength of the proof
00:10:19of the case? Yes,
00:10:23in my opinion, if we talk about percentages,
00:10:27this has a larger
00:10:30percentage than other evidence, right? Because
00:10:34this is what will be convinced that defamation
00:10:37or the act of defamation arises
00:10:41because there is or is not a fake or
00:10:44not a fake diploma, right? This is how it started,
00:10:48right? Well, that's why this is important, right?
00:10:52This diploma plays a very important role and has a very large
00:10:55percentage of proof. This means that if the prosecutor
00:10:59examines any number of witnesses without examining
00:11:02what, the reporting witness,
00:11:05and the evidence that proves that, what,
00:11:09the act that is qualified as defamation
00:11:12is not true because it turns out that there is
00:11:15a diploma, right? There is a diploma,
00:11:19then what, this becomes important. It holds
00:11:22the highest percentage, although again,
00:11:25although it must also correlate with
00:11:29other evidence, other witness statements,
00:11:32statements what, that are generated
00:11:36by information, by letters and so on, right? That's it. Well,
00:11:40there was also written evidence in the form of
00:11:44forensic examination results, if I'm not mistaken, by the police,
00:11:47right? Well, this is also important, yes, important in the sense
00:11:51of whether there is a correlation with the diploma that Mr.
00:11:55Jokowi has, that Mr. Jokowi's diploma was once examined
00:11:58by the police with a
00:12:01forensic examination. But actually,
00:12:05with the conclusion that it is considered authentic
00:12:08and so on, but actually it is
00:12:12not enough if forensic
00:12:15examination is not also linked with, for example,
00:12:18information from other institutions that issued it or with other
00:12:21witnesses who know about it. Because forensics
00:12:25only examines the authenticity of the paper,
00:12:30is examined by forensics, yes. Forensics
00:12:33does not prove that an original document
00:12:36was issued by what, a certain
00:12:39institution, for example, it does not prove
00:12:43that, unless there is
00:12:46comparative evidence, or
00:12:49unless there is other information
00:12:53that supports that it was indeed issued by a certain institution.
00:12:57Well, that's how it is. So when it is
00:13:00submitted in court,
00:13:03it still correlates with other evidence.
00:13:07What I mean is, is there a connection with
00:13:12the witness statements that were examined with the forensic
00:13:16evidence, with the diploma brought by Mr. Jokowi,
00:13:19is there a connection, is there a situation that supports each other
00:13:23or not? Well, that's what will prove whether it's authentic or not,
00:13:27or what will convince the judge whether the act of
00:13:30defamation exists or not, ma'am. Mr. Fikar,
00:13:34this also serves as an education for the public
00:13:37and society on how we should distinguish
00:13:40criticism protected by freedom of expression from
00:13:44acts that attack someone's good
00:13:46name.
00:13:49Okay, the boundaries are clear,
00:13:52in my opinion, right? When someone
00:13:55holds a public office,
00:13:59holds a public office, then any criticism,
00:14:01any objection, right,
00:14:07is directed at someone will definitely
00:14:11be directed at their public office, right? Because
00:14:14why, they don't actually have a legal relationship, they don't
00:14:18have any correlation, but because they
00:14:22hold a public office, public officials are... paid by
00:14:26the people's taxes, taxes paid by the people. So the people,
00:14:29in this case the public, have the right to express
00:14:33any of their views about
00:14:36decisions, about behavior, about anything done by
00:14:39a public official. Well, that's why when someone
00:14:43holds a public office,
00:14:47must be seen as criticism,
00:14:50right? It must be seen as criticism,
00:14:54even if... it mentions a personal
00:14:57name, it must be seen in the context of an official. He would never
00:15:01be criticized if he did not hold a public office,
00:15:04right? He would not be
00:15:07said all sorts of things by the community if he did not hold
00:15:11a public office. Well, that's why when he stops
00:15:15being a public official,
00:15:18then he returns to
00:15:22his natural state as an ordinary human being. That is, as an ordinary
00:15:26person, only then does it apply.
00:15:29Is it defamation or
00:15:33whatever it's called, yes, because
00:15:36what is defamed is a person. A person,
00:15:40not their office. Public office cannot be defamed, cannot
00:15:44be criminally prosecuted for expressing an opinion about
00:15:47that public office. Well, that's why we see this. Is this trial
00:15:51trying an act
00:15:55when Mr. Jokowi was still president or
00:15:58after that,
00:16:01right? Or acts that came after. I dare
00:16:04to guarantee that if it was stated when... Jokowi was still
00:16:08holding the position of president, then
00:16:11what that indictment,
00:16:14that suspicion will be dropped, right? It will be dropped,
00:16:18or at least even if proven, it cannot
00:16:20be punished because it is not, because
00:16:24it is freedom of opinion, because it is democracy, because it is
00:16:27the people's opinion, because it is the people's criticism of their
00:16:31public officials. Well, that's how it will be placed. Well, that's why
00:16:35it's very possible that this trial will try
00:16:40were taken after Mr. Jokowi was no longer a public official,
00:16:43after Mr. Jokowi was no longer president. I think that's
00:16:47what will be proven. But if
00:16:51there are still actions that are linked to his public office,
00:16:55that, in my opinion, will make this
00:16:58indictment fall through, right? Because that's it, because he's still
00:17:02holding a public office, but when he's already a private
00:17:06individual, then he has the right to sue people who are indeed
00:17:10considered to have committed crimes against him. That's it, ma'am. That's very interesting,
00:17:13Mr. Fikar, but we will discuss it more completely after this.
00:17:17Viewers, please stay with us in Metro TV breaking news.
00:17:45This Thursday, in Go Healthy, I suffer from
00:17:47diabetes. My blood sugar level was
00:17:51600. I thought that because
00:17:54I was a sports teacher, I could avoid
00:17:57health problems. It turns
00:18:01out that I was completely wrong. I regularly use
00:18:05laser technology. I feel...
00:18:08I am healthy and fit. Watch the full story.
00:18:11Thursday, November 5, at 1:31 PM.
00:18:15Calling all Indonesian documentary filmmakers. This is
00:18:19the time to make your ideas shine. Register now at Eagle
00:18:23Institute.id. Get a maximum production grant
00:18:26of Rp120
00:18:27million.
00:18:31We accompany you from afternoon until evening with actual and
00:18:34quality news. The hottest information.
00:18:42Metro today prime time
00:18:46news and top
00:18:48news.
00:18:51Renew and deepen your insights with the latest
00:18:54information only in evening
00:18:56programs
00:19:01today.
00:19:06We. Controversy exploration.
00:19:41This fake diploma and I also
00:19:45supporting evidence to be prepared.
00:19:48Was it
00:19:50true that before
00:19:53the incident
00:19:56on March 26,
00:19:59it had actually been since 202000.
00:20:0324
00:20:0425 and I think what
00:20:08was shown by
00:20:12was already excessive
00:20:14so I consulted
00:20:18with a legal advisor,
00:20:21Your Honor.
00:20:23And
00:20:28viewers, we invite you again to discuss with Mr. Abdul
00:20:32Fikar Hajar as a criminal law expert. Mr. Fikar, are you
00:20:35still with us, sir?
00:20:38Okay, ready. Mr. Fikar, if we
00:20:42just talked about distinguishing criticism that is protected by freedom
00:20:45of expression from acts that attack
00:20:49someone's good name, then in this case, how will
00:20:53the prosecutor have to prove that the actions of Roy Suryo
00:20:57and Dr. Tifa are criminal acts
00:21:00and not just acts of expression
00:21:03and criticism of public
00:21:06officials?
00:21:08Yes, the boundary is what I said earlier,
00:21:11whether the actions taken by Roy
00:21:15Suryo or Dr. Tifa
00:21:18were done
00:21:21when Mr. Jokowi was still holding a public office
00:21:25or after. That's what will be
00:21:28the clear dividing line. If it's still as a public
00:21:32official, in my opinion, this case is not relevant,
00:21:36because as I said earlier, the pattern of relationship between
00:21:40Roy Suryo and Tifa with
00:21:43Mr. Jokowi is that of president and people,
00:21:47and their people and society. That's the pattern
00:21:51of relationship. "But when he is no longer holding
00:21:54a public office, then the pattern of relationship
00:21:57changes. It changes to a relationship between
00:22:01citizens. So whatever happens,
00:22:05it can be a criminal aspect, and it can also be a civil aspect.
00:22:09Well, defamation, for example, as I said
00:22:13more of a civil aspect, because the person who is harmed is more of an individual,
00:22:17actually. It's just that there is a larger public interest that needs to be protected."
00:22:21If people are allowed to insult others just
00:22:24like that, then many people will insult others. That's why this
00:22:27then becomes a criminal article,
00:22:30this defamation becomes a criminal article. Well, that's why
00:22:34the
00:22:36actions taken by Roy
00:22:39Suryo or Dr. Tifa are qualified as
00:22:42defamation and can be brought to court,
00:22:45even though, as I said earlier,
00:22:49in the social
00:22:53facts, many such incidents
00:22:56happen, whether on social media or in other forums,
00:23:00right? It just doesn't go to court, right? It's more
00:23:04resolved by consensus or by
00:23:06meeting and then
00:23:09conducting negotiations and so on.
00:23:12Well, that's what happens. Well, that's why I say
00:23:16that this case going to court
00:23:20is also part
00:23:23of Mr. Jokowi's sensitivity as a human
00:23:26being, right? When he is
00:23:29told this and that, he feels
00:23:33defamed. That's why he takes legal action,
00:23:36ma'am. Mr. Fikar, if we know that Roy Suryo and Dr. Tifa
00:23:40have different backgrounds and roles, must the elements
00:23:44of fault and criminal responsibility be proven individually,
00:23:48sir?
00:23:50Yes, crime is an act
00:23:54of individuals, yes. Even if
00:23:57they act on behalf of a corporation,
00:24:01it is represented by individuals, individuals who have
00:24:04the authority to make decisions within that corporation. Well, that's why
00:24:08both the actions of Roy Suryo and
00:24:11the actions of Dr. Tifa must
00:24:15be proven separately, yes. They cannot
00:24:18be generalized. Because the cases, if I'm not
00:24:21mistaken, are separate, aren't they? They're not
00:24:25combined. There is a defendant, Roy Suryo,
00:24:28and a defendant, Dr. Tifa, separately. That's why
00:24:32they must be held personally responsible,
00:24:35right? Because a criminal act is a personal
00:24:38responsibility, unless it officially
00:24:41represents a corporation, and even then there must be
00:24:45a decision from a general meeting of
00:24:49shareholders that decides the actions taken by
00:24:52the corporation. But if it's an individual act, then they must
00:24:55be held criminally responsible individually.
00:24:59Like that, ma'am. Hmm, Mr. Fikar, again
00:25:02we see the legal process that is currently
00:25:06ongoing will certainly have an impact
00:25:09on society. This also serves as a means to
00:25:12educate society. Will a legal process like
00:25:15this have the potential and also create a deterrent effect, we can say, on society
00:25:22later? Yes, what I said earlier,
00:25:25freedom of expression is also limited by law,
00:25:29freedom of interaction with
00:25:33other people is also limited by law. There are rules of the game,
00:25:36right? But the problem is
00:25:40what I said earlier, whether freedom
00:25:43of opinion is placed in a forum
00:25:45of democracy, then it will become
00:25:49a different dialogue, right? Well, that's what
00:25:53happens, the interaction
00:25:56between public authorities and society,
00:26:00right? That's usually how it is. But
00:26:03if it's between people, or between
00:26:06party officials and party officials, that's already a private
00:26:10matter, right? When there are sentences or
00:26:13expressions that are personal, that can
00:26:17become a problem itself, yes, it can become a legal problem,
00:26:21yes, both civil and criminal. Well, the boundary
00:26:24is whether freedom of opinion
00:26:28is what applied in
00:26:31the public sphere, but
00:26:34towards public institutions or
00:26:38towards individuals, that's the boundary. If it's towards
00:26:41individuals, then there will
00:26:44definitely be legal consequences, both criminal and civil.
00:26:48But when it's done towards
00:26:51individuals, but the person
00:26:54is currently holding
00:26:58a public office, then the context is
00:27:02freedom of speech, the context is
00:27:05criticism, the context is
00:27:08giving an opinion about something, an act done
00:27:11by that public official. Well, so the
00:27:15boundaries that distinguish it
00:27:19are that public office, even though in reality,
00:27:22for example, the interrelationship is between
00:27:25individuals, but when someone holds a public office,
00:27:29then there is no such thing as
00:27:32defamation or any crime
00:27:35related to someone's opinion, but when that person
00:27:39as a private individual, don't forget that a
00:27:42public official, even if he
00:27:45is not on duty, he goes out, he still holds the position of
00:27:49a public official, meaning that when someone holds
00:27:52a public office, it doesn't stop, unless his position is terminated,
00:27:56retired or dismissed, that's how it is, Miss, Mr.
00:28:00Fikar, if later the indictment... is not proven, will
00:28:03there be legal
00:28:05consequences?
00:28:07Yes, if the indictment is not proven, it's like this, the court
00:28:11has possibilities eh uh what's it called
00:28:14eh three, right, the first is the indictment
00:28:17rejected, meaning it's not proven if
00:28:21rejected, right, or the indictment is not accepted,
00:28:25now if it's not accepted, it means the, actually the event has not
00:28:28fully entered the main
00:28:32case. or it is declared uh
00:28:35what not accepted yes not accepted
00:28:37it hasn't entered yet, it's still not accepted and rejected, right,
00:28:41if rejected, it means not proven, but
00:28:44if uh not accepted
00:28:47yes the act
00:28:50is proven, but it turns out that the act is not a criminal
00:28:53act, but as I said earlier, it can be criticism, it can be
00:28:57an opinion, so he can be released,
00:29:00the name is different, right, if acquitted, if acquitted,
00:29:04it's uh not proven at all, if released,
00:29:07the act is proven but it's not a criminal act,
00:29:11yes, but he is released
00:29:13from uh what's it called uh the criminal
00:29:17charge or the criminal act, because that act
00:29:20for example in the context of self-defense, in
00:29:23the context of uh what's it called public notification
00:29:26uh uh that there is a
00:29:30situation involving this person and... so on, for example, be careful and so on, that is also
00:29:33part of
00:29:36uh what's called uh facts that can
00:29:40release someone from what
00:29:43from uh criminalization or from a court
00:29:46sentence, so what limits or differentiates
00:29:50is uh what to what
00:29:53extent eh criticism or opinion is
00:29:57thrown out, right, uh
00:30:00what when that person is in a
00:30:03public office or or he is no longer a public
00:30:07official as I said earlier a public official is never off
00:30:10duty, even at night he is not working, he is still
00:30:14the village head, he is still the governor, he is still
00:30:17uh what a public official, right, so because of that, when interacting
00:30:21with uh the community then he uh
00:30:24what the pattern is that earlier, right, giving opinions,
00:30:28criticism and so on, that's how it is, Miss, yes, Mr. Fikar,
00:30:32this is interesting, because what the Panel of Judges is concerned about
00:30:35is that the verdict in this case is not just to resolve
00:30:39the conflict between the parties but also to provide
00:30:42but we will discuss it after we find out
00:30:46the latest conditions at the East Jakarta District Court, our colleague Rona Marina is already there
00:30:49who will report live from the East Jakarta
00:30:53District Court.