Dian Kuswandini, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
The South Jakarta District Court was criticized Tuesday for its use of Indonesian laws in a child custody battle involving American citizens.
The court took Jonathan Kine's custody rights over his six-year-old daughter away for one year Monday after he lost a legal battle against his wife, Purnima Ralhan Kine.
Frans Hendra Winarta, the chairman of the Indonesian Foundation for Legal Studies, and Arist Merdeka Sirait, the secretary general of the National Commission for Child Protection, both said the court wrongly used the 2002 Child Protection Law and the 2004 Domestic Violence Law when interpreting the case.
Frans said the court should not have taken away Kine's custody rights over his daughter if he was still married to his wife.
"As long as a husband and wife are not divorced, they both have custody rights over their children and no one can take these rights away from them," he told The Jakarta Post.
Frans said Indonesian laws could only be applied to foreigners in civil cases if they agreed.
"But if a foreigner does not agree with Indonesian laws being used, then the court should not continue with the trial," he said.
Kine's lawyer, Bertua Hutapea, said she asked presiding judge Syafrullah Sumar not to continue with the trial as her client did not agree with Indonesian laws being used.
Arist said the verdict should not be valid because the court incorrectly used the Child Protection Law to separate Kine from his daughter.
"In fact, the law prohibits anyone from separating children and their parents," he told the Post.
He said guardianship over a child could only be withdrawn if one of the child's parents was guilty of committing a crime, used drugs or was mentally ill.
Arist said the couple's daughter had the right to legal protection and the right to be nurtured by both her mother and father.
"That is why we will follow up on this case and recommend to the court that the verdict be annulled," he said.
Arist said Kine had earlier asked the commission to help settle the case. In response to the request, representatives from the commission met the girl on several occasions, he said.
"In our interviews with the girl, we found out she was under pressure from her grandparents (Ms. Kine's parents), which caused her to have negative views about her father," Arist said.
"The girl actually wants her parents to be together again as she loves both of them."
In August last year, Ms. Kine moved to her parents' house in Kuningan, South Jakarta, which is next to the couple's residence, following a dispute between the two.
She took the couple's daughter with her, preventing Kine from seeing her.
Ms. Kine later asked the court to take away her husband's guardianship rights over their daughter, saying sole custody should be granted to her and her parents.
She also filed a report with the Jakarta Police accusing her husband of domestic violence (not beating, as reported in the Post on Jan. 22).
Another member of Kine's legal team, Suhendra Asido, said the court's decision should not have been based on the domestic violence allegations as the report was still being investigated by police.
The South Jakarta District Court was criticized Tuesday for its use of Indonesian laws in a child custody battle involving American citizens.
The court took Jonathan Kine's custody rights over his six-year-old daughter away for one year Monday after he lost a legal battle against his wife, Purnima Ralhan Kine.
Frans Hendra Winarta, the chairman of the Indonesian Foundation for Legal Studies, and Arist Merdeka Sirait, the secretary general of the National Commission for Child Protection, both said the court wrongly used the 2002 Child Protection Law and the 2004 Domestic Violence Law when interpreting the case.
Frans said the court should not have taken away Kine's custody rights over his daughter if he was still married to his wife.
"As long as a husband and wife are not divorced, they both have custody rights over their children and no one can take these rights away from them," he told The Jakarta Post.
Frans said Indonesian laws could only be applied to foreigners in civil cases if they agreed.
"But if a foreigner does not agree with Indonesian laws being used, then the court should not continue with the trial," he said.
Kine's lawyer, Bertua Hutapea, said she asked presiding judge Syafrullah Sumar not to continue with the trial as her client did not agree with Indonesian laws being used.
Arist said the verdict should not be valid because the court incorrectly used the Child Protection Law to separate Kine from his daughter.
"In fact, the law prohibits anyone from separating children and their parents," he told the Post.
He said guardianship over a child could only be withdrawn if one of the child's parents was guilty of committing a crime, used drugs or was mentally ill.
Arist said the couple's daughter had the right to legal protection and the right to be nurtured by both her mother and father.
"That is why we will follow up on this case and recommend to the court that the verdict be annulled," he said.
Arist said Kine had earlier asked the commission to help settle the case. In response to the request, representatives from the commission met the girl on several occasions, he said.
"In our interviews with the girl, we found out she was under pressure from her grandparents (Ms. Kine's parents), which caused her to have negative views about her father," Arist said.
"The girl actually wants her parents to be together again as she loves both of them."
In August last year, Ms. Kine moved to her parents' house in Kuningan, South Jakarta, which is next to the couple's residence, following a dispute between the two.
She took the couple's daughter with her, preventing Kine from seeing her.
Ms. Kine later asked the court to take away her husband's guardianship rights over their daughter, saying sole custody should be granted to her and her parents.
She also filed a report with the Jakarta Police accusing her husband of domestic violence (not beating, as reported in the Post on Jan. 22).
Another member of Kine's legal team, Suhendra Asido, said the court's decision should not have been based on the domestic violence allegations as the report was still being investigated by police.
