Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Ari Pramuditya, Rofiq Hidayat
The Criminal Code. Photo by: SGP
Capital punishment remains a notorious and controversial part of Indonesia’s Criminal Code in the wake of the Bali Nine controversy, with many inveighing both in favour of and against the death penalty. Now, as the time comes to revise the country’s Criminal Code, many politicians are still of the opinion that the death penalty remains an appropriate punishment for those who commit serious crimes.
Dossy Iskandar, a member of the Working Committee (“Committee”) currently deliberating the Indonesian Criminal Code Draft Bill (“Draft Bill”), stated recently that the government, which is working closely with the Committee, had not yet entered into any discussions of the so-called “problems inventory” (Daftar Inventarisasi Masalah – “DIM”) as it relates to the death penalty. This is primarily due to the fact that such discussions will undoubtedly lead to intensive and lengthy debate.
A number of parties remain opposed to the death penalty in the context of human rights and are seeking to have the death penalty excluded from the Draft Bill. Meanwhile, other politicians believe that the death penalty should remain on the statute books for serious crimes and should thus be incorporated into the Draft Bill.
Mr. Iskandar, a member of House Commission III, recognizes that while the inclusion of a death-penalty clause comes straight from the government, there will nevertheless be a heated debate on the subject. According to Mr. Iskandar, one faction of the house is hoping that the death penalty will be included in the Draft Bill, while the other faction is demanding the exact opposite.
“However, in order to accommodate the plural nature of our nation, the death penalty is still important,” Iskandar declared.
The Hanura-party politician went on to explain that his faction believed that the death penalty should be included in the Draft Bill and then implemented throughout the country’s national criminal-justice system. Even though a “moderate” view is touted that positions the death penalty as just one form of possible punishment among a number of alternatives, capital punishment is still mandated in Indonesia for serious crimes, including gross violations of human rights, terrorism and narcotics.
“It should certainly prove to be a long debate as the House grapples with the principles of justice and prudence. On the one hand, this is about the fate of citizens, on the other hand, we are looking to protect the country and its people,” Iskandar clarified.
Arsul Sani, also a member of both the Committee and the United Development Party (Partai Persatuan Pembangunan), declined to offer any comment on the inclusion of the death penalty in the Draft Bill, as the Committee and the government have yet to begin any discussions relating to the death-penalty DIM. Mr. Sani did state however that several factions had already offered up notes and thoughts on the death penalty based on the principles laid out in the Draft Bill.
According to Mr. Sani, both the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (Demokrasi Indonesia Perjuangan) and the Democratic factions of the House have formulated human-rights related criticisms of the Draft Bill. Human-rights activists across the country consider the death penalty to be an anachronism which should be removed from the criminal-justice system.
“The death penalty runs contrary to modern notions of human rights, so we should formulate any legislation with caution,” Mr. Sani stated.
Supriyadi Widodo Eddyono, a member of the National Alliance for Criminal Code Reform, believes that the majority factions in Commission III agree that the death penalty should be incorporated into the Draft Bill as an alternative punishment. However Mr. Eddyono also stated that the government’s plan to transform capital punishment into an alternative punishment “middle ground” was problematic.
“It is not in line with the spirit of the Indonesian Criminal Code reform and punishment reform," Eddyono said.
Moreover, the supposed middle ground occupied by the government and the parliament on this issue may lead to a number of new problems, such as lengthy ten-year stints on death row. “Adopting the middle-ground position will lead to problems, while the mechanisms involved in capital punishment are also problematic,” Mr. Eddyono concluded.
(sp)
Ari Pramuditya, Rofiq Hidayat
The Criminal Code. Photo by: SGP
Capital punishment remains a notorious and controversial part of Indonesia’s Criminal Code in the wake of the Bali Nine controversy, with many inveighing both in favour of and against the death penalty. Now, as the time comes to revise the country’s Criminal Code, many politicians are still of the opinion that the death penalty remains an appropriate punishment for those who commit serious crimes.
Dossy Iskandar, a member of the Working Committee (“Committee”) currently deliberating the Indonesian Criminal Code Draft Bill (“Draft Bill”), stated recently that the government, which is working closely with the Committee, had not yet entered into any discussions of the so-called “problems inventory” (Daftar Inventarisasi Masalah – “DIM”) as it relates to the death penalty. This is primarily due to the fact that such discussions will undoubtedly lead to intensive and lengthy debate.
A number of parties remain opposed to the death penalty in the context of human rights and are seeking to have the death penalty excluded from the Draft Bill. Meanwhile, other politicians believe that the death penalty should remain on the statute books for serious crimes and should thus be incorporated into the Draft Bill.
Mr. Iskandar, a member of House Commission III, recognizes that while the inclusion of a death-penalty clause comes straight from the government, there will nevertheless be a heated debate on the subject. According to Mr. Iskandar, one faction of the house is hoping that the death penalty will be included in the Draft Bill, while the other faction is demanding the exact opposite.
“However, in order to accommodate the plural nature of our nation, the death penalty is still important,” Iskandar declared.
The Hanura-party politician went on to explain that his faction believed that the death penalty should be included in the Draft Bill and then implemented throughout the country’s national criminal-justice system. Even though a “moderate” view is touted that positions the death penalty as just one form of possible punishment among a number of alternatives, capital punishment is still mandated in Indonesia for serious crimes, including gross violations of human rights, terrorism and narcotics.
“It should certainly prove to be a long debate as the House grapples with the principles of justice and prudence. On the one hand, this is about the fate of citizens, on the other hand, we are looking to protect the country and its people,” Iskandar clarified.
Arsul Sani, also a member of both the Committee and the United Development Party (Partai Persatuan Pembangunan), declined to offer any comment on the inclusion of the death penalty in the Draft Bill, as the Committee and the government have yet to begin any discussions relating to the death-penalty DIM. Mr. Sani did state however that several factions had already offered up notes and thoughts on the death penalty based on the principles laid out in the Draft Bill.
According to Mr. Sani, both the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (Demokrasi Indonesia Perjuangan) and the Democratic factions of the House have formulated human-rights related criticisms of the Draft Bill. Human-rights activists across the country consider the death penalty to be an anachronism which should be removed from the criminal-justice system.
“The death penalty runs contrary to modern notions of human rights, so we should formulate any legislation with caution,” Mr. Sani stated.
Supriyadi Widodo Eddyono, a member of the National Alliance for Criminal Code Reform, believes that the majority factions in Commission III agree that the death penalty should be incorporated into the Draft Bill as an alternative punishment. However Mr. Eddyono also stated that the government’s plan to transform capital punishment into an alternative punishment “middle ground” was problematic.
“It is not in line with the spirit of the Indonesian Criminal Code reform and punishment reform," Eddyono said.
Moreover, the supposed middle ground occupied by the government and the parliament on this issue may lead to a number of new problems, such as lengthy ten-year stints on death row. “Adopting the middle-ground position will lead to problems, while the mechanisms involved in capital punishment are also problematic,” Mr. Eddyono concluded.
(sp)