In one of those hard-to-understand decisions that seem all to frequent in Indonesia these days, an Indonesian court on Oct 27 slashed the jail term of radical Muslim cleric Abu Bakar Bashir. Mr Bashir had been sentenced to 15 years jail in June after being found guilty of helping to plan terror attacks. He was also convicted of funding the establishment and operation of a paramilitary training camp in Aceh.

There have been a series of incidents recently in which convicted terrorists have received punishments widely considered too light in view of the severity of their crimes. Earlier this month, a West Jakarta Court sentenced military trainer Abu Thulut to eight years in jail for his role in running the Aceh camp. Prosecutors had demanded a 12-year term.

Then there is the case of Muhammad Jibril, who received a five-year term in June last year for concealing information about the bomb attacks on the JW Marriott and Ritz-Carlton hotels in Jakarta in 2009. Prosecutors had sought a seven year term.

The official reason given for reducing the jail term of Mr Bashir was his advanced age. He is 72. But outside Indonesia, there will be many who suspect the judges of harbouring other motives. Did they secretly sympathise with Mr Bashir's actions? Or were they just scared of retribution by his supporters? The first motive - although barely credible - will be widely believed by many outside Indonesia who know little about the country. The second possible motive is alarming, the more so because it might just possibly be true.

Few Indonesian judges have forgotten the case of Syaifuddin Kartasasita, the judge who upheld an 18-month jail sentence for corruption on Hutomo Mandala Putra, the youngest son of former Indonesian president Suharto. Judge Kartasasita was shot dead from close range as he drove his car to his office in central Jakarta in July 2001. Mr Putra, universally known as Tommy, was later sentenced to 15 years jail for ordering the hit.

For Westerners - not to mention quite a few Indonesians - Mr Bashir's reduced sentenced will nevertheless be hard to accept. I remember finding it difficult to explain to my elderly mother in Melbourne, Australia, that Indonesians did not really hate Westerners. She could not understand why the Indonesian authorities were taking so long to execute Ali Amrozi bin Haji Nurhasyim, the so-called "smiling bomber"

Amrozi was found guilty of involvement in the 2002 Bali bombing, in which dozens of young Australian died. Although sentenced to death by firing squad in August  2003, legal technicalities delayed his execution for five years.   

Those who still suspect that Indonesians in general harbour sympathy for terrorists need to consider the fact that throughout its post-independence history the vast majority of citizens have consistently voted for secular nationalist parties. Islamist groups have been - and continue to be - confined to the fringes of political life. Ordinary Indonesians have also cooperated with police in tracking down terrorist suspects. It was local villagers in Aceh, for example, who first alerted police to the existence of the militant training camp Mr Bashir helped establish.

The light sentences handed down by the courts must be especially frustrating for Indonesia's security and counter terrorist organisations. They have done a fine job over the years in tracking down terrorists and bringing them to justice. Parliament has also finally gotten around to supporting the endeavour. It recently passed the country's first Intelligence Bill, designed to give the authorities broader powers to fight terrorism. Under the new law, the State Intelligence Agency will be allowed to wiretap, with court approval, suspected terrorists and coordinate its operations with the police, military and state prosecutors.

Perhaps the only thing that can be said with any real certainty about the Indonesian court system is that it regularly seems to hand out light sentences to just about anybody with a modicum of money or political influence. Tommy's sentence was later reduced to five years. And in June this year a magasine that published an article describing him as a "convicted murderer" was ordered to pay 12.5 billion Rupiah (US$1.46 million) in damages.