Trial by Prejudice: Fatia and Haris’ Uphill Battle

I’ve been watching the defamation case trial involving the courageous Indonesian human rights defenders, Fatia Maulidiyanti and Haris Azhar. From the very first hearing on 3 April 2023, I’ve attended at least four hearings, including the most recent one today. But as the trial unfolds, it’s becoming painfully clear that the judges are becoming more biased, showing a disturbing inclination towards favoring the plaintiff.

The first hint of this biased stance came during the interlocutory decision hearing on 22 May 2023. On 17 April, Fatia and Haris’ lawyers filed an objection note, raising valid concerns about the separation of their case files by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and questioning the judges’ rationale for accepting such a move.

Their objection was based on a straightforward fact: during the police investigation phase, everything was neatly recorded in a single case file. So when the police handed over the investigation results to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, they did so in one document. Therefore, according to standard practice, it was only logical that Fatia and Haris be joined as co-defendants, allowing them to be tried together. Sensibly, they united their legal teams into a single force.

But lo and behold, when the case file reached the Public Prosecutor’s Office, and the court went along with it, Fatia and Haris found themselves facing separate trials. They couldn’t be tried simultaneously, in front of the same set of judges, at the same time. Fatia had her own schedule, and Haris had his. And so, the court’s bright idea was to schedule Haris’ trial in the morning, starting at 10 am, followed immediately by Fatia’s trial until who knows when. The first hearing ended around 3 pm, subjecting all parties involved, including the public prosecutors and judges, to an excruciating five-hour ordeal.

This absurd setting has wreaked havoc on Fatia and Haris’ camp. First, their valiant defense lawyers have been enduring marathon trial sessions where they have to repeat the same arguments over and over again since the subject matter of both trials is virtually identical. It’s like watching Game of Thrones’ last couple of seasons: just tiring.

And spare a thought for Fatia and Haris’ dedicated supporters who have been tirelessly trying to attend the hearings and monitor the case firsthand. Sadly, only a handful are allowed inside the courtroom, while the rest are left to face the scorching Jakarta sun and the pouring rain outside. It’s like an endurance test to show their solidarity.

As if that wasn’t enough, the consecutive scheduling of the hearings, with Haris’ trial in the morning and Fatia’s trial right after, leaves the defense team with minimal time to regroup, strategize, and adequately prepare for each session. It’s a rushed affair that can undermine their ability to mount a strong defense and effectively address any unexpected twists and turns.

And let’s not forget the toll it takes on Fatia and Haris themselves. Enduring grueling trial sessions, where they face relentless questioning and scrutiny, can have a devastating psychological impact. It’s like a mental marathon that drains their energy, harms their focus, and affects their overall well-being. And we can’t expect them to present their case effectively when they’re running on fumes.

But wait, there’s more! Today, in a twist that surprises absolutely no one, the plaintiff, none other than the Minister of Maritime and Investment Affairs, conveniently chose to be absent from the trial. In a letter submitted by the prosecutors to the judges, they claimed that the esteemed minister was traveling abroad on official state duty, representing the government. How convenient, right?

And what did the judges do? Oh, you guessed it! They obediently bowed down to the plaintiff’s demands and scheduled the next hearing according to his desires, i.e., on Thursday, 8 June 2023. They justified it by citing their “discretion” and a burning desire to expedite the judicial process. But pardon me for not feeling convinced. When one of the most influential figures in Indonesia, if not the most powerful, calls the shots, it’s hard not to question the judges’ independence.

The reasons behind my skepticism are manifold. From the very first hearing, there was an unspoken understanding between the judges, prosecutors, and Fatia and Haris’ legal team to hold the hearings every Monday. But now, all of a sudden, the judges decided to break the pattern, throwing consistency out the window. If they were truly consistent, they could have scheduled the next hearing for Monday, 12 June, as they had done before.

Instead, they chose to rely on their so-called “discretion,” conveniently leaving us in the dark about the compelling reasons behind their decision. This lack of transparency only adds to the mounting doubts about their impartiality. It’s becoming increasingly clear that they’re more interested in catering to the plaintiff’s convenience than in upholding the principles of an independent trial.

Ultimately, we’re left wondering whether justice can genuinely prevail when law enforcement officials seem more concerned with accommodating the powerful than ensuring a fair and equal process for all parties involved. Fatia and Haris deserve better. They deserve a trial where the judges demonstrate unwavering independence, where scheduling is consistent and transparent, and where justice is pursued without compromise. Anything less undermines the very essence of a fair trial.