Fallout from the Ba'asyir Verdict

By Kenneth Conboy

Late on Thursday, the Indonesian Supreme Court overturned the two-year conviction for militant cleric Abu Bakar Ba'asyir. In doing so, the court was saying that the conviction of Ba'asyir was invalid--and his involvement in the 2002 Bali bombing is not proven. The court also ordered the government to "rehabilitate" Ba'asyir's name, though at least one government spokesman on Thursday was insisting that they still viewed Ba'asyir as a terrorist.

Few had anticipated the Supreme Court verdict, though in a sense it is not a surprise. During two separate trials, the Indonesian government prosecutors had put together incredibly weak cases against Ba'asyir. Part of this was blamed on incompetence.

Too, part of their failure to piece together a strong case against Ba'asyir was blamed on an Indonesian regulation that exclude any testimony not given to Indonesian authorities on Indonesian soil. In some cases, the prosecutor's found innovative ways around this regulation. One terrorist held in Singapore, for example, was allowed to testify via closed-circuit television. Another al-Qaeda terrorist, the late Umar Faruq, was quizzed by Indonesian police in Afghanistan who had pragmatically raised an Indonesian flag and designated Faruq's cell as Indonesian territory.

But even more damning testimony from terrorists held overseas--like Hambali, who reportedly gave crticial evidence that dealt with bombings in 2000--never made its way to the court room.

Regardless of where the fault lies, an emboldened Ba'asyir is certain to ratchet up his already fiery rhetoric. Yesterday was definitely two steps backward for Indonesia's counter-terrorist effort.

TrackBack