|
Transparency International ranked the late Suharto as the world's leading kleptocrat with a fortune estimated at $15-$35 billion. -- PHOTO: AP
|
JAKARTA - TIME magazine said on Thursday it had filed a petition to Indonesia's Supreme Court asking it to reverse a 1 trillion rupiah (S$153.8 million) libel ruling in favour of former Indonesian President Suharto.
The case is seen by many analysts as an important test of Indonesia's legal system and freedom of speech.
Time, owned by Time Warner Inc, published a May 1999 cover story alleging that Suharto, who died in hospital last month aged 86, and his family had amassed a fortune of around $15 billion (S$21.2 billion), including $9 billion (S$12.7 billion) in an Austrian bank account.
Time magazine won two appeals in lower courts, but in September 2007 the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Suharto and order Time to pay damages of over $100 million and to print apologies.
'The Court's judgment was a blow to the rights of a free press in Indonesia,' Mr Michael Elliott, editor of Time International, said in a statement issued on Thursday.
Time said it has asked a new panel of Supreme Court judges to reinstate the decision of the lower courts.
'The case is not just about Suharto versus Time, it's about freedom of the press versus authoritarian control of the press,' said Todung Mulya Lubis, Time's legal counsel in Jakarta.
In its 'Suharto Inc' story, Time wrote that Suharto's six children owned significant stakes in at least 564 companies in Indonesia, while their overseas interests included hundreds of other firms from the United States to Uzbekistan.
Suharto's salary was only $1,764 a month when he left office, the magazine said.
Suharto first filed a lawsuit against Time in 1999 seeking damages of 183 trillion rupiah, equivalent to nearly $20 billion at the current exchange rate.
Transparency International ranked Suharto as the world's leading kleptocrat with a fortune estimated at $15-$35 billion.
Attempts to bring criminal charges for graft against Suharto were dropped in 2001 because the supreme court justice at that time ruled he was too ill to stand trial. -- REUTERS
|