ARTICLE
Salim Osman - Straits Times
This is from a few years ago but it remains a hotly debated topic.
Is Indonesia on the cusp of abolishing the death penalty, which is used as a sentencing tool against terrorism, premeditated murder and drug trafficking?
Although the death penalty is rarely handed down, it is still the focus of human rights groups, which want the government to end capital punishment because of its rights violation and its supposed ineffective deterrence of crime.
Two recent developments have prompted the question.
First, it has emerged that President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has been quietly using his constitutional prerogatives to grant clemency to convicts, including those on death row, since 2004 after winning the election.
The clemency has reduced the sentences of 19 drug offenders, including four on death row, whose lives have been spared from certain death by firing squad.
Three of the condemned men were Indonesians, while the fourth was a foreigner. Their sentences were commuted to life in prison.
Two of the Indonesians were former civil servant Deni Setia Maharwa and his accomplice Meirika Pranola, who were caught with a third accomplice at the Jakarta International Airport before a flight to London in 2000. They were found to be members of a syndicate trying to smuggle heroin and cocaine.
Deni was granted clemency in January this year, and Meirika in November last year, on humanitarian grounds, as they were deemed couriers, not traffickers. It was not revealed when the third accomplice received his clemency.
Earlier last month, a three-judge panel of the Supreme Court overturned the death sentence of drug lord Hengky Gunawan, converting it to a prison term of 15 years.
Hengky was convicted in 2007 of running a major ecstasy production and distribution ring from Surabaya in East Java.
The judges said that the death sentence in Hengky's case was antithetical to the Constitution, which enshrines a right to life.
Second, Cabinet members have come out not only to defend the granting of clemency to drug offenders on death row, but also to link it to advocacy for Indonesians in foreign prisons.
In separate remarks, Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa and Deputy Justice Minister Denny Indrayana said that the decision to commute the death sentence handed down to drug convicts was part of a wider push to move away from capital punishment.
Marty said recently that globally, more countries had stopped using the death penalty, although it remained on their statutes, as it does in Indonesia.
"The policy of commuting a death sentence for a drug crime is not something that happens just in Indonesia," he said.
"This policy is also practiced in other countries, and Indonesians are among the beneficiaries of such clemency."
The clemency has reduced the sentences of 19 drug offenders, including four on death row, whose lives have been spared from certain death by firing squad.
Three of the condemned men were Indonesians, while the fourth was a foreigner. Their sentences were commuted to life in prison.
Two of the Indonesians were former civil servant Deni Setia Maharwa and his accomplice Meirika Pranola, who were caught with a third accomplice at the Jakarta International Airport before a flight to London in 2000. They were found to be members of a syndicate trying to smuggle heroin and cocaine.
Deni was granted clemency in January this year, and Meirika in November last year, on humanitarian grounds, as they were deemed couriers, not traffickers. It was not revealed when the third accomplice received his clemency.
Earlier last month, a three-judge panel of the Supreme Court overturned the death sentence of drug lord Hengky Gunawan, converting it to a prison term of 15 years.
Hengky was convicted in 2007 of running a major ecstasy production and distribution ring from Surabaya in East Java.
The judges said that the death sentence in Hengky's case was antithetical to the Constitution, which enshrines a right to life.
Second, Cabinet members have come out not only to defend the granting of clemency to drug offenders on death row, but also to link it to advocacy for Indonesians in foreign prisons.
In separate remarks, Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa and Deputy Justice Minister Denny Indrayana said that the decision to commute the death sentence handed down to drug convicts was part of a wider push to move away from capital punishment.
Marty said recently that globally, more countries had stopped using the death penalty, although it remained on their statutes, as it does in Indonesia.
"The policy of commuting a death sentence for a drug crime is not something that happens just in Indonesia," he said.
"This policy is also practiced in other countries, and Indonesians are among the beneficiaries of such clemency."
Even as they spoke, Malaysia announced that it was considering abolishing the death penalty for drug offenses.
For the first time, Denny admitted that the main reason behind this softening on capital punishment has been the need to free Indonesian migrant workers who are on death row overseas.
What prompted this was the public outrage over the execution of an Indonesian maid, Ruyati Sapubi, 54, who was beheaded for murdering her abusive employer in Saudi Arabia in June last year.
Since then, the Indonesian government has set up a fund to pay "blood money" to Saudi families to seek the freedom of its citizens.

The Deputy Justice Minister told Kompas newspaper on Oct. 23 that there were a total of 298 Indonesians on death row in other countries as of July last year.
Through its advocacy efforts, Indonesia managed to persuade foreign governments to commute the death sentences of 100 of them, including 44 drug offenders on death row.
"Frankly, if our President is to make an appeal for clemency for our citizens jailed abroad, we can strengthen our case by offering clemency to foreign convicts here," Denny said.
There is no certainty that this would work as the Indonesians, including those on death row for murder and drug trafficking, are jailed mainly in Saudi Arabia and Malaysia. No Saudis or Malaysians are known to be on death row in Indonesia.
Indonesia may have second thoughts on the death penalty, but it is still too early to say that it will abolish capital punishment any time soon. It is also not certain that Yudhoyono will grant clemency to the remaining 100 still on death row.
The majority of Indonesians still view the death penalty for drug traffickers as justified.
While it is seen as a rights violation by human rights lobbyists, many Indonesians also view drug abuse as a rights violation of the victims, who cannot lead normal lives because of their dependence on drugs fed by the traffickers.
Hence, it is not surprising that the clemency granted by Yudhoyono to the four condemned prisoners and the leniency given to the drug lord by the Supreme Court unleashed a storm of criticism from public figures that underscored the overwhelming sentiment supporting the death penalty for drug traffickers.
The Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), which is the highest authority on Islam, and the largest Muslim organization Nahdlatul Ulama criticized the clemency decisions, saying that they were a setback to the fight against drug trafficking that posed as serious a threat to the nation as corruption and terrorism.
"The three are extraordinary crimes and should be dealt with seriously through the imposition of extraordinary punishments or the death penalty," said MUI executive chairman Ma'aruf Amin.
It is clear that affording clemency to drug offenders goes against the grain of majority opinion in Indonesia. Most people still frown upon any leniency to drug traffickers. Hence, capital punishment will have to stay.
But the dilemma for Indonesian leaders will be how to reconcile this domestic concern with the task of saving the lives of many Indonesians on death row abroad for drug trafficking and murder.
For the first time, Denny admitted that the main reason behind this softening on capital punishment has been the need to free Indonesian migrant workers who are on death row overseas.
What prompted this was the public outrage over the execution of an Indonesian maid, Ruyati Sapubi, 54, who was beheaded for murdering her abusive employer in Saudi Arabia in June last year.
Since then, the Indonesian government has set up a fund to pay "blood money" to Saudi families to seek the freedom of its citizens.
The Deputy Justice Minister told Kompas newspaper on Oct. 23 that there were a total of 298 Indonesians on death row in other countries as of July last year.
Through its advocacy efforts, Indonesia managed to persuade foreign governments to commute the death sentences of 100 of them, including 44 drug offenders on death row.
"Frankly, if our President is to make an appeal for clemency for our citizens jailed abroad, we can strengthen our case by offering clemency to foreign convicts here," Denny said.
There is no certainty that this would work as the Indonesians, including those on death row for murder and drug trafficking, are jailed mainly in Saudi Arabia and Malaysia. No Saudis or Malaysians are known to be on death row in Indonesia.
Indonesia may have second thoughts on the death penalty, but it is still too early to say that it will abolish capital punishment any time soon. It is also not certain that Yudhoyono will grant clemency to the remaining 100 still on death row.
The majority of Indonesians still view the death penalty for drug traffickers as justified.
While it is seen as a rights violation by human rights lobbyists, many Indonesians also view drug abuse as a rights violation of the victims, who cannot lead normal lives because of their dependence on drugs fed by the traffickers.
Hence, it is not surprising that the clemency granted by Yudhoyono to the four condemned prisoners and the leniency given to the drug lord by the Supreme Court unleashed a storm of criticism from public figures that underscored the overwhelming sentiment supporting the death penalty for drug traffickers.
The Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), which is the highest authority on Islam, and the largest Muslim organization Nahdlatul Ulama criticized the clemency decisions, saying that they were a setback to the fight against drug trafficking that posed as serious a threat to the nation as corruption and terrorism.
"The three are extraordinary crimes and should be dealt with seriously through the imposition of extraordinary punishments or the death penalty," said MUI executive chairman Ma'aruf Amin.
It is clear that affording clemency to drug offenders goes against the grain of majority opinion in Indonesia. Most people still frown upon any leniency to drug traffickers. Hence, capital punishment will have to stay.
But the dilemma for Indonesian leaders will be how to reconcile this domestic concern with the task of saving the lives of many Indonesians on death row abroad for drug trafficking and murder.
Taken from the Singapore Straits Times, reprinted in the Jakarta Globe.
I wouldn’t agree if Indonesia take off the death penalty or even if they cancelled the death punishment because of drugs. It is because, when the government punish them only for several years, they still can do the transaction even if they are still at the jail. The effect is if the drug dealers still keep on selling the drugs to the Indonesian especially the youngsters. The generation will be stupid and also causes addiction to drugs or the worst thing is it can cause us to death. On the other hand, a lot of people also disagree with the death punishment because killing is bad for them and other stuff which also causes a dilemma to the government. In my opinion, government should be strict because this activity will have an impact on Indonesians generation growth. Death penalty is surely fair for the dealers because it also will prevent the growth of more dealers so people will really avoid drugs. We also need to tighten the security and to uphold rules in the immigration so none of the drugs arrived to Indonesia.
ReplyDeleteMuhamad Hassya Santoso- Thursday Class
ReplyDeleteThe death sentence is seen as a massively debatable topic in the current era of struggle for full enforcement of human rights . From a human rights perspective it may be seen as an inhumane act to execute another human because of his or her mistake. While every human is sure not to be perfect and free of wrongdoings, it can be said that to a certain degree it may unacceptable and a danger to society. From this point on I do not support the abolishment of the death penalty. According to the text the death penalty is only used against heavy crimes which are terrorism, premeditated murder and drug trafficking. I would say to potentially carry out these sentences against people who carry out these crimes are justified. If we recount from the history of Indonesia and take for example the Bali bombings, that specific event had a very painful domino effect on Indonesia and its foreign counterparts. In terms of socio-political views it had negative effect as it enlarged the stereotype in which Muslims practice a radical form of their religion and are intolerant to other faiths and culture. If taken from an economic point of view, it degrades the marketability of Indonesia and because of that the amount of tourists Indonesia is able to attract decreases drastically and has a major impact on the foreign exchange reserves. In short terms Indonesia in my opinion should not abolish the death penalty on those 3 violations because of the massive negative impact it has on the country in a multitude of areas.
I think we should abolish the use of death penalty in our law enforcement system because based on my opinion killing the criminals doesn’t really solve the real issues. Drugs and terrorism will not vanished if you just killing everyone who involved in these crime. Instead, we should solve the problem from the deep roots. Majority of drugs sold in Indonesia produced overseas. Maybe we could cooperate with other government to prevent transnational drug transactions happening. We could also deport foreign drug traffickers and permanently deny their access to Indonesia. As for terrorism, we should limit our people from visiting countries with history of terrorism and extremism.
ReplyDeleteWe also have to protect our migrant workers from being executed abroad. Maybe the human rights group who condemn the use of death penalty in Indonesia could help the government freeing Indonesians on death row in foreign country instead of just protesting our government’s policy.
The death penalty punishment is always a controversial topic to talk about in Indonesia. Some people may disagree on it and some may agree on it, but personally to some extent I would agree if Indonesia would want to kill of the death penalty punishment. In my opinion, there are several crimes in Indonesia that would deserve the death penalty for example like drug trafficking , terrorism etc. but besides that it would be unnecessary for the death penalty to be applied. I would mostly disagree on the death penalty punishment because it actually contradicts with Indonesia’s 1945 constitution in article 28A which states “ Every person shall have the right to live and to defend his/ her life and existence“ whereas if a person is punished with the death penalty then he/ she could not exercise their right that has been stated in article 28A in the constitution. The death penalty is not always effective because when talking about durf trafficking and terrorism, they will always do the crime in a form of group where not everyone in the group would get punished. However there is no other punishment that would bring justice for people who do those type of crimes, so in my opinion Indonesia’s government would need to come up with a more effective way to deal with people that is doing those crimes or should increase the security of the country.
ReplyDeleteTalking about death penalty has been an ongoing debate from time to time whether it is effective in eradicating criminal activities as high as drug trafficking or against the human right to live. Personally, every criminal has its chance no matter how terrible the crime they have committed before. Western countries such as USA and countries in Europe have banned capital punishment of death penalties due to their beliefs that it is against the human right to live as a human. Its effectiveness is also questioned as in developing countries crimes such as drug trafficking and abuse are not fully controlled as it is in developed countries that ban death penalty. Indonesia should consider putting aside death penalty as a punishment and focus more on tackling the real issue, tracking down drug traffickers. Yes, they may have taken the right of others to live that took the drugs by living in being dependent on these drugs but this does not give us the right as well to take their full right to live as a human. If other countries can do it, why can’t Indonesia? For me, penalty should be about the effectiveness to tackle criminal activities (top bottom from the the law and regulatory issues) but not about the severity of the punishment itself.
ReplyDeleteThe people of Indonesia have a different perspective on the death penalty. We can't say if it is right or wrong without seeing from both perspectives. A death penalty might be effective because the perpetrator would not repeat their crime ever again and others who intend to do such crime would be frightened because of the punishment. However, it's not effective because not all people are afraid of death and the biggest problem is sometimes the people that is executed is possibly innocent. Therefore, I have to say that I disagree with the death penalty because no one should have the right to take a life. No one should ever decide who deserve mercy and who doesn't because every each one of us has the same rights. Looking at my own moral compass, even if it's a crime that is dreadful enough to make us feel revengeful, I think that forgiveness is always preferable. The Indonesian government should stop using death penalty and publicly recognize that death penalty is not justified and should be abolished.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Indonesia is becoming too soft when it comes to enforcing laws, especially when it comes to cases relating to drug production, trafficking and terrorism. Before reading the article, my opinion was that drug dealers , terrorist , trafickers should receieve death penalty. I believe so as i personally believe that the only way to decrease crime rates is by enforcing laws with a high consequences such as death penalty. I believe that by enforcing death penalty, a detterent effect on commiting simiar crimes can be created as fear is the best weapon a man can have when words (law) isn’t effective. But after reading the article above it opened up different perspectives which i never thought off. One of those ideas was to give clemency to crime convicts which can be by changing a death sentence to a lifetime in prison sentence. I agree with the new concept which is slowly coming to play in the courts of Indonesia as it can also help indonesia citizens who has been labelled as crime convicts in foreign countries. The help i’m reffering to is enlightenment of charges or punishment charged to tindonesian convicts. Although i have to say that i don’t totally agree with indonesia’s action of taking off death penalty fully. I personally believe that death sentence shouldn’t be removed entirely. In my opinion, death sentence should still apply to drug dealers and terrorists but as for drug users, i think the best solution is by offering rehabilitation sessions to remove addiction towards drugs.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I understood, death penalty is an important debate in Indonesia. Personally, even if I can understand some of the arguments in favor of the death penalty, I am against it for various reasons.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I don’t think that anyone has the right to decide if someone should live or die whatever this person may have done, and I believe that there are better solutions. For example, sending a criminal to jail for all their life might be more useful than just killing them as they would have time to think about what they have done and regret it. I also think that the death penalty may be harder to live with for the family of the person killed than for the criminal.
Then, I think that we can question the limit between which crimes deserve to be condemned with death penalty and which do not. For example, I do not think that drug trafficking is a bigger crime than sexually abusing children as drug users usually decide to buy drugs whereas children abused are really innocents.
Death penalty has been a controversial issue in Indonesia. Personally, I believe that death penalty is a suitable punishment for those who did premediated murder, terrorism and drug trafficking. I don’t think that Indonesia will kill of the death penalty, because death penalty might put an end to some kinds of crimes. Indonesia needs to improve its strictness to enforce the law so that the people that does those kinds of crimes are afraid to do things that are against the law. They can be held in prison, but even that has its own flaws. In previous occasion, convicts are given a lot of facilities that they should not receive. These problems create some doubts about whether the prison cell is the right place for those convicts or not. From my own point of view, it is better for Indonesia to keep the death penalty, so that we can reduce the number of crimes in the future.
ReplyDeleteIn my very honest opinion, the decision to have capital punishment to stay has always been a dilemma. On the other hand, I see capital punishment as something that you can’t live without when running a society engulfed in state of diplomatic turmoil. For those who see such punishment to be a violation on human rights will surely change their opinions when it comes to certain cases of offense that require serious penalty. Furthermore, life sentence imprisonment is definitely of no help since there is always a chance of the perpetrator being paroled, especially in countries where the governments are often accused of corruptions. Therefore, if capital punishment were to stay, it needed to be managed under the authority of a government that has earned the trust and full support of its entire citizens it swore to protect. Not only that, us citizens, also need to realize that decisions made by the government will not always be sunshine and rainbows, knowing that there are bound to be mistakes along the way, either the consequences are fatal or merely trivial. Sometimes it is the citizens who are too spoiled and blind to see through the reasons behind the decisions their government has spent countless hours discussing. Then how about all the human rights activists who are found on different corners of the Earth and still bother to complain about how a country they don’t even live in should be managed? When we examine this further, this is nothing but a consequence of globalization which makes the entire population of the Earth think that they belong to a country they need a passport to enter to. You’ve got to be kidding me. Therefore, I suggest the government also see them the same way it sees its own citizens and treat them that way. Steve Jobs once said, ”If you want to make everyone happy, don’t be a leader, sell ice cream”.
ReplyDeleteI believed that death penalty is one of the most important crime penalty. There aren’t any other crime penalties that intrigued more fear that I know of. The first thing why death penalty shouldn’t be killed off is because of the fear of death penalty can make the future perpetrator at least second guess the act of crime itself. Though death penalty can also become a double edge sword making the perpetrator think less about the crime that they are doing. By having a chance of being executed, future perpetrator can become more violent or active in terms of drug trafficking thinking that they wont suffer in a jail cell for the rest of their life. From a human rights perspective death penalty is a wrong doing toward the perpetrator because morally it is wrong to take someone live. Acting as if we are God judging people when they are going to die. On the other side of the spectrum these people that is sentenced to death penalty can also ruin hundreds or maybe thousands of other people lives. This discussion of whether death penalty is acceptable or not has a lot more points that can be talked about but my personal opinion towards this topic is not to “kill off death penalty.
ReplyDeleteAlthough dead penalty is often seen as an inhumane way to impose a punishment to a criminal I personally think that it is needed. Yes, it does violates the human rights to live but these criminals that were sentenced to death also does the same thing to lots of their victim. The difference is if we give these criminals a death sentence we violates the human rights of one person which is in some sense it is definetly wrong but we have to remember that these criminals are the one that violates the human rigths possibly hundreds, or maybe thousands times. According to the image above of ‘capital punishment in 2012’ Indonesia has given capital punishment to 12+ criminals. These numbers are significantly low because according to www.nasional.kompas .com In 2012 there were 316.500 criminal case they also stated with these numbers we can say that every 91 seconds a crime is being committed in the nation. Thus, I believe the governments should give capital punishment if necessary. The government must provide protection for the human rights of innocent people by giving capital punishment for heavy criminals. Personally I believe that there is a crime that can be forgiven but there is also a crime that can’t.
ReplyDeleteDeath penalty has always been a controversial topic in Indonesia. On one hand, I agree the act of death penalty because it is effective to punish perpetrators especially of serious crimes (drug trafficking, corruption, serial killers, etc). But on the other hand, I disagree to the act of death penalty because it doesn’t reflect Indonesia’s constitution about the right to live. In addition, it does not go with the religious believes and human rights of not taking away another person’s life. However, the system of prison punishment is not too effective, because there are still many prisoners that still enjoy the privileged life of living comfortably in prisons.
ReplyDeleteBut many criminals still commit crime even when they are behind bars. For example, there are still drug lords conducting drug-trafficking from inside their cells. For conditions like this, death penalty seems to be the perfect solution. I personally feel that the government should be able to come up with a better system of punishments.
The topic of death penalty has always been a controversial and debatable issue especially in Indonesia, where the people are always so easily divided by the most minor issues. There are two approaches regarding the issue of death penalty here : That the death penalty does not violate human rights because human rights offender has violated the human rights of victims and society and the opposing belief, that death penalty does violate human rights because of the revocation of life of a human being and does not grant the chance of self-introspection. Indonesia is a country held strong by the pillars of it’s very own philosophical and ideological foundation, Pancasila, in which death penalty is discordant to it’s second and fifth principles, each respectively reads “A just and civilized humanity” and “Social justice for all Indonesians”. With this I believe that death penalty should only be implemented in special cases such as if a person is jailed once for their heinous acts, however repeated what they did after they got discharged. This means that they have been given a second chance to repent but have no conscience to do so. For the cases of drug offenses, murders and corruption, I believe that there are alternative punishments, including life in prison without the possibility of parole. As for the diplomatic issues on death penalties, the leaders of the countries involved will have to come together and negotiate to then achieve a fair and square solution.
ReplyDeleteWe all know that taking the lives of other human beings can't be justified. It is violating the most basic human rights which is the right to live. I believe that there is always another way of dealing with things, even if it seems like there is nothing left to be done. In this case, the first step that we must make is finding out why we use the death penalty in the first place. Is it because death penalty is a good punishment that will make people think twice about doing capital crimes? Is it because of safety reasons? If so, I strongly agree for the government to abolish death sentence and substitute that sentence to life imprisonment. Life imprisonment doesn’t violate the most important human right (although it does violate some) and it is more meaningful than just killing the criminal. He or she can right their wrongs, positively support or get positive support from other criminals that may have the same problem, and in general life imprisonment will make them better people whereas death penalty will only make us lose people. I believe that every single person can always be beneficial to others in any way, that is why we should stop using the death sentence.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I would believe that it would be better if the death penalty would be reinforced by the government since it would definitely reduce the crime rate in this country since it would create the fear of committing criminal activities that can result in death sentences such as murder, drug dealing but then, it should be followed by a strict regulation by the government as well as consent from the citizens. Eventhough that it violates the rights of humans to enjoy life, if the way these individuals “enjoy” their rights to live by ruining someone’s life through the usage and drug dealing transactions or even took someone’s right to live by killing the individual in particular is also violating the rights as well as laws. Indonesia have the goal to eliminate the drug dealing and drug abuse activities in indonesia through the organisation called BNN. The death penalty should be enforced for those people, especially for the drug dealers since when they’re imprisoned some still have the ability to drug dealing inside the prison cells or watching the transactions being done by the den’s right-hand man. If indonesians wanted to reduce the death sentence, it should be followed by even a stricter penalties, or the prisons should be equipped with personnel that can able to track as well as will not fall for money given by the prisoners relatives in order to release or to shorten the duration of their imprisonment period.
ReplyDeleteThe death penalty subject has been a sensitive topic because it is related to the human rights. In my very honest opinion death penalty is just a big human rights violation because we as human has absolutely no rights to determine one's life or death. The death penalty I think is just an act of revenge, for example if someone raped a victim, should we raped the criminal also? The answer is no right? So I think to be called as a civilized society we has to established a new, modern kind of law system that embrace every single rights that human have. There has been some arguments that said that the death penalty is cheaper for the government rather than detained the criminal for life. But I think imprisonment is the only way criminals to think about what they've done and hopefully regrets everything they've done and try to become a better person.
ReplyDeleteThe death penalty in Indonesia always bring the cons and pros, some people said it is needed for those drug dealers, terrorists and murderer to be sentenced to their death while on the other hands it really against the right of human law, but in my opinion for the people who committed such those crimes really have to be punished as hard as possible, we are in need to discipline our people, we have to give that "deterrence effect" on our people and showed them what can really happen if you do something against the law, and if we look back at our history it seems that the death sentence is really promising to push down the crime rates in our country, even some of us justify this as an immoral act I still agree with the govt using the death penalty, after all the death penalty itself is for the better future for our next generation of this country
ReplyDeleteFirst and foremost, it is evident that drug smugglers that got caught in Indonesia are mostly foreigners. The law being implemented by the country applies to any drug smuggler that came in to the country, regardless of where the particular smuggler came from. This policy has raised some eyebrows, especially from countries that bring up cases such as their innocent nationals being framed by the local authorities, for instance. However, nine times out of ten, drug smuggling acts are being carried out by organised international crime syndicates. Not to mention that notorious drug lords are in control of the chain supply of the drugs even from behind bars, due to the power that they have over the lenient authorities in charge that are also willing to take bribes. Thus, death sentences might not be enough. The government also need to uncover the network from inside, not only catching them with their pants down.
ReplyDeleteWhile a lot of people would disagree about the death penalty. It think that death penalty would be the most suitable for heavy crime such as drug, terrorism, sexual predator, etc. some might say that killing the criminal doesn’t really solve the problem, but in my opinion even though the death penalty doesn’t solve the problem, it gives some sort of satisfaction to the society and shock therapy for the criminals. It think it will really makes the drug traffickers think twice before entering Indonesia. While killing human because of their mistakes may seems inhumane, humans are left with choices and if drug trafficking is their choices, I think that they should know what the consequences are. Death penalty is a fair punishment because there will be some degree of mistakes that poses a very dangerous threat to the society and cannot be forgiven. I think death penalty is the most effective way to tackle the upcoming criminal and especially drug traffickers from entering Indonesia.
ReplyDeleteDeath penalty goes both ways on pros and cons, but mostly people agree that this sanction violates the human rights. In my opinion, it depends on the case. ‘ The majority of Indonesians still view the death penalty for drug traffickers as justified ‘ , as the article mentioned, i have to agree with that. Because the traffickers might ruin victims’ lives caused by the addiction. Especially the lower middleclass and teenagers. Drugs can slowly hurt a generation when missused. These drugs lords and traffickers can still operate within prisons, that’s an ugly truth we gotta face. So life-sentences are just downgrades to the illegal business, they won’t kill it sufficiently. At least the damage done to the society is far more severe than traffickers recieving death penalties. There are no guarantees that drugs traffickers won’t repeat the same crime once they get released. We acknowledge just how and why addictions are so hard to escape. So death penalty is acceptable to me personally. As for other cases, crimes that are on purpose or accidental, should be evaluated and examined thoroughly before being sanctioned to death penalties.
ReplyDeletePersonally I am in neutral side when it comes to death penalty. For me, the types of punishment depend on the crime that has been done. In my opinion, the government’s policy regarding death penalty for drug dealers is not fair. Because drug traffics go both ways. There’s always consent between the sellers and the buyers, and when there is no demand, there will be no supply of drugs. So I think the type of penalty for dealers as well as users should be balance. For example, maybe the government should sentence the dealers for a life-time jail instead of death penalty and provide rehab facilitations for drug users. In terms of death penalty, I agree if such punishment is sentenced to a rapist or terrorist. Because those crimes are committed based on the perpetrator’s own desire and wants. No one wants to be a victim of rape or terrorism. So my conclusion is I am fine with the existence of death-penalty in Indonesia, what matters the most to me is for whom and why the sentence is given.
ReplyDeleteTruthfully, I think the death penalty violates the human right. I believe humans deserve to live, and the death penalty doesn’t exactly give any chance to set the mindsets of the convicts right. However, it does make others reconsider their actions, so they wouldn’t make the wrong choice, or else they would receive the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteConsidering Indonesia’s condition right now, regretfully, I agree we have to maintain the death penalty. Because, even with the death penalty still being practiced under the law, some people still violate the law anyways. Moreover, granting clemency will not solve the problem that the government has.
I support life sentence rather than death penalty. However, it’s not possible for Indonesia to abolish death penalty completely, right now. We would need a lot more money to support lives of the life sentenced convicts. We need to have more facilities or place for the convicts.
Therefore, I can’t agree with abolishing the death penalty completely, for the time being. But, I do agree we can’t have the death penalty forever in Indonesia. I believe someday, we can abolish it and still live peacefully among each other in a country that is united and loved by all Indonesian.
The view of the death penalty in Indonesia is indeed a topic that is quite controversial to talk about. Since the enactment of the rule, there have been pros and cons from the community. Usually the cons are related to human rights violations. In my own opinion, I have no problem with the enactment of the death penalty, but the government needs to further investigate which criminal actions should be sentenced by death penalty. Drug sales are one example of action, which should not be given such death penalties, although basically we all realize that drugs are very dangerous. However, it is different from rape or robbery, drug users have the opportunity to choose, whether they want to use drugs, or not, so actually, the use of drugs cannot be separated from the sellers and buyers. On the other hand, as I have said before, criminal acts like rape, robbery, or even murder like terrorists, the offender should be punished accordingly, so in this criminal context, I agree with the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteI personally believe that the death penalty is not the right solution especially regarding drug traffic issue, as it doesn’t resolve the problem on the long run, it’s a short-term solution that violate basic human right. Death penalty is mostly use to dissuade criminal and create fear, however it is not a helpful solution for anyone, I am not trying to defend drug dealer but most of the time people don’t go on the drug business with a risky life style by choice, but because that is their ultimate solution against poverty, they do those risky jobs to try to earn money and feed their families, in this case the death penalty do scare them of course but doesn’t stop them, if the government want to stop drug traffic they should first try to eradicate poverty. I do believe in a system that would help people, instead of punishing them.
ReplyDeleteI hold the belief that the death penalty is a justifiable punishment for terrorism, as I think terrorists are too dangerous to be let alive. Terrorists plan the murder of innocent civilians with no remorse for the devastating consequences of their acts. They are always prepared to die, so the prospect of receiving a death penalty is not really a concern. The motives of terrorists are also very hard to empathize with, which makes it difficult to support the removal of the death penalty for convicted terrorists.
ReplyDeleteThe case is different with drug dealers. Cases pertaining to drug dealers in Indonesia are often riddled with problems like the lack of a presumption of innocence and language barriers. Unlike terrorists, the motives of drug dealers are also varied. Some were forced to do it due to financial reasons, like Walter White in Breaking Bad. Because of these reasons, I deny the death penalty for drug dealers if their crimes are not too destructive.
Death penalty is a sensitive topic to be discussed in Indonesia, as there are some people which support the death penalty conducted by the government as the punishment applied to the criminals which related with drugs for example, for me personally it I important to do such punishment to those criminals which is not only destroying themselves but also the generation after, it is like giving the pillars in terms of criminality to the next generation,hence this country will cease to exists if the criminals are being ignored based on the terms of human rights. in my opinion, why should we care about the human rights of the people that trying to destroy our nation, by destroying the next generation? Which is nonsensical. The people who opposed death penalty, based on my opinion is the people who always criticised what the government does, but know nothing if government doesn’t do such things to criminals. So the death penalty is a good action taken by the government to stop the growth of, for example drugs. And such strict shouldn’t be shut down or kill off , so the government can bring order in this nation, although it is a democratic country. Because if there is no order enforced by the government the situation within this society will be chaotic and Indonesia might cease to exist in the future.
ReplyDeleteI would strongly disagree if Indonesia kill of its death penalty. In the case of drugs, death penalty is there for distributors not for users, police department usually deal with these drug users by giving them rehabilitation. Not only for drug distributors, death penalty would be given for murderers and also terrorists. Indonesia is famous for its drug trafficking death penalty, there had been foreigners being given death penalty for trafficking drugs to Indonesia. I personally think death penalty help strengthen Indonesia’s discipline. Death penalty helps to avoid people from doing drug trafficking. On the other hand, family of the victims of murders and terrorist want the perpetrator to be given death penalty, in other words, life for life. I found nothing wrong with the victims’ family opinion since these perpetrator should receive consequences of their action whether they like it or not. What the government should work on is clemency. Usually, before execution, these perpetrators are being kept in prison for years. Some had been kept for years. People change and there is nothing wrong by giving these people a second opportunity, there are families wanting them to go back to their hometown alive.
ReplyDeleteThe discussion regarding death penalty remains controversial until today. The topic is not solely controversial with regards to ethics and human rights but also concerning the flawed justice system in Indonesia. My response regarding to the passage will focus more on exploring different perspectives on death penalty in Indonesia.
ReplyDeleteOne side of the perspective would argue that death penalty violates the most fundamental right of human, the right to live as supported by Article 28 I of Indonesia’s Constitution. Another supporting argument include the critics on the inefficiency of death row and how death sentencing an individual does not solve or diminish the problem. On the other side, those who are in favor of death penalty argues for deterrence effect as the result of death penalty. Another interesting point of view to examine death penalty is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism point of view states that the right action is the one that produces the most happiness. Within a certain depth, a utilitarian would argue that death penalty should be abolished as it results in a great amount of pain to the criminal. However, when we take into account the pain of the criminal in comparison to the positive social consequences other citizen, the sum of happiness received by citizen with the presence of death penalty would outweigh the pain felt by criminals. In this case, continuation of death penalty will bring more benefits to the majority.
Nevertheless, I personally believe that Indonesia must improve its justice system first from the root before making any significant changes in the regulation regarding death penalty.
Based on the article, the death penalty in Indonesia still be a polemic topic. Although the constitution of Indonesia has adjusted all of the punishment sometimes the prosecutor doesn’t sentence according to regulations. For instance, when a hook was accused about religion defamation, they got punished for 2 years in jail, even there are a lot defamatory in Indonesia who is severer than him. All of that injustice situation caused by money. Thus, in my opinion, Indonesia should not kill off the capital punishment, but this situation must collaborate with anti-corruption spirit. That is a significant spirit to have by all of the prosecutors. As we know, if someone consumes the drugs, like cocaine or heroin, they will use it constantly, and hard for them to stop their behavior. This situation will make the drug trafficker glad and make them have a big money. So, instantly, they will use the money to buy off the prosecutor, finally, they don’t get their capital punishment, maybe just get in a jail. And this kind of case which makes the drug trafficker success with their business. Thus, I will conclude that capital punishment should be done as our constitution regulation for drug trafficker without any excuse.
ReplyDeleteThis is a morally gray area from my perspective. Some consider death sentence as a violation of human rights. And I've heard of some countries that abolished the act of taking a convict's life as a punishment. But, should drug kingpins, dealers, traffickers, couriers, and possessors serve the same sentence? What if someone just sold drugs to a guy, should this guy be jailed and also put in death row? The same punishment as the one's who mass produced and sell these illegal substances? I'm not saying that I absolutely condemn death sentence but save it for the actual demons that walk among us. I think death sentence should be for the most heinous of crimes. Drug lords, corrupt politicians, terrorists, rapists, serial killers, etc., they deserve to walk the green mile, face the firing squad, hanged and also euthanized. Don't give out death sentence all willy nilly and all that.
ReplyDeleteFor me I strongly disaggre if the Indonesian government kill of the death penalty, if we think did someone really deserved a death penalty because a mistake his or her make? I will answer yes, depends on the mistake they make, based on the text a drug dealer or a drug smuggler for me should received a death penalty or not based on the impact they make if the amount of the drug they carried is too much or not, as we already know the drug impact to the young generation or society were so bad, drug can even kill someone, so for me a death penalty to the drug dealers is a must especially to their cartel leader or boss. On the other hand If we talked about terrorism and corruption we still punished them by the amount of mistake and impact they make, so it was all about the mistake they make. So for me let the authority judge it based on the law they already set
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the death penalty shouldn’t completely be put to an end. However, I do agree that capital punishment violates one of the most basic human rights, which is a right to live. As a matter of fact, I also agree with the idea of life imprisonment. I think life imprisonment is really effective because it slowly kills the convicts by putting them in jail for their entire life, which very unpleasant, so the convict could change to become a better person. While giving a capital punishment to the suspect that’s proven guilty, only make them suffer for a short period of time, which is the execution part (if you don’t believe in life after death). Nevertheless, I strongly disagree that the death sentence should be completely terminated. Because if the death penalty were put into a complete end, then people will take the advantage of this and use this chance to feel comfortable on committing a felony, thus resulting into more felonies committed over the years. This is why we need death sentences because it acts as a border and awareness for people to not commit a felony. To summarize it all, I do agree that capital punishment shouldn’t be used all the time for convicts, who committed a felony. However, at the same time, I disagree with the idea of banning the death penalty completely, because I think there are some cases where it’s necessary to use the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, it is better if Indonesia is not applying the death penalty, even for a heavy crime, like drug trafficking, terrorism, premeditated crime, etc. Furthermore, when Indonesia is applying death penalty, people still can do crime while inside the jail. One example can be the head of drug trafficking organisation which can be already arrested. Under his command the transaction still happen by his partners or subordinates, even though he is already waiting on the death row. We also have to think about the cost of applying the death penalty. Indonesia have to take out around two hundred millions per case. Including transportation, accommodation, even holding a funeral for the criminals. Human rights should be considered in any case, primarily the right to live even though they did a heavy crime they still got the right to live as written what in our constitution, UUD 1945 28a. If the government still wants to applying death penalty, they have to be more strict, maybe without giving clemency to the criminals. The reason of softening on capital punishment is to free Indonesian migrant workers, who sentenced death at Saudi Arabia and Malaysia. But no Malaysians or Saudis are known to be on death row in Indonesia. So, it is actually not effective to be applied.
ReplyDeleteI have two thoughts about this topic, my first opinion is, that death penalty is a very effective way to strike fear into people who are thinking about doing a felony. I think death penalty should only be given to crimes that are on a very high level, such as terrorism, murder, rape, and drug trafficking. And I think, by giving these high level crimes, high level of punishment too, I hope that in the future, these high level of crimes will decrease in numbers. My second opinion is, I am not really sure that death penalty is the most effective form of punishment. I mean, there must be other form of punishment that are as effective as death penalty. For example, life imprisonment or decades of imprisonment, I think should be as effective as death penalty, and also these form of punishment could also give the person who committed the crime a chance to correct themselves and try to be a better person. My final thought is, I absolutely agree on death penalties, but I also think that other form of punishments are as effective as the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteSo here we will speak in term of the law. Indeed, in the case of death penalty, there are many debates that occur in the community. Many people think that the death penalty is not in accordance with human rights. But that's how the law works, law exists to regulate the pattern of human life. If we only use sympathy and different points of view, then a problem will not get a solution.
ReplyDeleteThe law exists to provide solutions to society. In this case the death penalty is still being debated in Indonesia.The Minister of Religion of the Republic of Indonesia, Lukman Hakim Saifuddin said the death penalty in Indonesia is a positive law that is still applied today. The reason, he said, is that drug crime has a destructive power towards generations and nations, as well as corruption. In my opinion, the death penalty is legal because if we only use an individual's human rights as an excuse and do not pay attention to the human rights of 261.1 million Indonesians, this is very absurd.
The National Narcotics Agency (BNN) noted the number of drug abusers in the country reached 3.5 million people in 2017. Nearly 1 million of them have even become addicts. This is a very serious problem because drugs can damage the future of this nation. Because the number of drug dealers is very structured, it requires an action that can have a deterrent effect and death penalty might be the best one. In conclusion, I strongly agree if the death penalty is appointed in Indonesia because until now, there is no punishment that can replace it. The death penalty has a large level of effectiveness.
Death penalty for people who are involved in terrorism and drug trafficking has always been a highly debatable topic. Many people are against it, but the number of people who are in favour of this regulation is also not small. People who are supporting death penalty for people who committed these crimes would usually say that they deserve death sentence, because what they’ve committed has brought a lot of negative effects to the society. Especially to teenagers who are usually prone to drugs and brainwashes. From my point of view, I don’t think death sentence is the right way to punish these people. Thus, I would support the government if they decide to abolish the death penalty as a punishment for drug dealers or terrorist. What is the positive impact after taking these people’s lives? I don’t think there is any. People should know that people who committed these types of crime were usually born in poverty. They don’t have the money to afford education and they didn’t choose to do those crimes and live that type of life. They committed crimes because they need money, to continue their life and afford foods. I think it would be better if these people are arrested and given educations about life and to bring them back to the right pathway of living life.
ReplyDeleteHello sir, I'm Fikri from the Friday Class
ReplyDeleteDrug is one of the biggest problem that us, Indonesians have been fighting with since a long time. Drug trafficking is already been done since a long time ago, and has been spreading across the world. Being a drug dealer is one of the most profitable thing to do as they (drug dealer) said, but also one of the riskiest business. Most people would do it for the huge amount of money, but they didn’t think about the risk. Indonesia has been giving the drug dealer a death penalty, or a lifetime sentence. In my opinion, giving death penalty is the best answer to deal with this kind of problem. Drug dealer should be given death penalty, because if you only gave them lifetime sentence in prison, they still could distribute the drugs in the prison, to the fellow convicts. As we already know, there have been some case that the warden also helped the drug dealer to distribute the drugs, and supply the drugs from outside the prison. Also if they are given the clemency from the authorities, they will go out and again, doing the drug business.So the only solution for dealing with this problem, is giving the death penalty to the drug dealer convicts.
This is one of the most cliche topic to talk about yet still become one of the most debatable one. Therefore, for the sake of my integrity i have to agree with the implementation of death penalty in Indonesia. I do agree with the fact that human rights should be applied to all citizens of every country in the world. However, i also felt like this concept of human right has been misused by lot of people who utilize its function as a shield to protect themselves against the punishment for heavy crimes such as drugs, sexual assault, terrorism, etc. Basically, human are left with choices, if they decided to act crimes, meaning that they are ready for the punishment and they are giving away their human right to be decided by the court. They know the consequences, they know the impact, and therefore wether the punishment will go against their human right or not it actually doesn’t matter anymore because its clear that they don’t even think and care about it when they did their crime.
ReplyDeleteDeath penalty is a very scary threat to all criminals. In jail, people can go out easily with money whereas death penalty, people cannot go back because it involves the life of a person. People can get scammed that they are a criminal and have their head taken off and the real criminal can just run free. In my opinion, a hardcore criminal should just be imprisoned for a very long time and have a trustworthy guard beside it. Bribery is going to happen because people cannot contain their desire towards money. When a wrong person is being executed, the government will not look it as a very big loss, but the family of the person will be saddened. The government should just threat the terrorist or corrupter with a very convincing statement. If the criminal call it a bluff, then they should execute 1 criminal so that the other criminals believe that the government is serious.
ReplyDeleteReading the title for this article, my mind goes straight to the term "what you did is what you get". Some people believe in karma. I believe that what you did in the past will always effect your future. So in this case, deciding the punishment for the suspect of the crime, we should first see what exactly did they do, what type of crime they're involved in. If they in fact killed an innocent people with no particular reason, I say do the death penalty. In my religion, we believe the term "an eye for an eye". If you cut off a man's finger, then your finger will get cut as a punishment. If you punched someone in the eye, then you must also get a punch from them or from anyone else as a punishment. Same goes for death case. When someone is murdered, imagine how their relatives and close friends must feel. Of course they would want some justice from the court. We all know that killing the killer won't bring back the victim, but at least they got some justice out of it, and that would help them ease their sadness from their loss.
ReplyDeleteI think Indonesia should keep the death penalty for the three things mentioned, but for this comment, I will discuss why I think the death penalty, regarding to terrorist and premeditated murderers should still be kept. This is not because I don’t thing drug trafficking is less bad than the others, in short, I think there are more effective ways to abolished drug trafficking. However, not killing the murderers and terrorist will devaluate the victims lost lives.
ReplyDeleteSure, no lives can be resurrected, and revenge is never the answer; but justice is still need to be held.
If a person who killed dozens of men, women and children is living a functional life in a facility while the families of the victims are left with traumas that no one besides them can imagine, is it fair? If live is truly valuable and precious, shouldn’t we treat heinous acts like murders and terrorism as acts that deserves the death penalty?
I personally think that people who conduct crimes aren't even afraid of punishment. Ever seen a corruptor who is smiling although they are in jail? They aren't afraid of losing a few years in jail; they are afraid of being poor. The same issue with those who are crazy enough to smuggle drugs or conduct terrorism; they aren't afraid of death. I remember the time when Aman Abdurrahman who was a bomber in Thamrin is given a death penalty, he directly did a prostration of thankfulness showing his gratitude. I also watched when a drug smuggler was about to be given a death penalty and did an interview, he seems really relaxed and doesn't seem to regret anything he did. Aside from that, giving death penalties is a violation of human rights, which is taking one's life. Who are we to decide whose life can we take? As someone who believes in God, I think as human the only effort that we can do is to give them life imprisonment.
ReplyDeleteThe death penalty has always been a hot topic over the years. Indonesia has implemented capital punishment for some time now, and many have pointed out some good arguments for and against the action as a way to punish convicts. Usually, the death penalty is implemented on crimes against humanity or ones that involve homicide. In some countries like Indonesia, the death penalty is also implemented for drug trafficking violations for suppliers and couriers. Many argue that the death penalty should be implemented if the convicted has committed major crimes relating to loss of life but drug related cases should not be dealt with capital punishment. Others argue that drugs ruin lives and therefore the perpetrators should have their lives taken away. The most notorious case in Indonesia is the Bali Nine where a group of nine Australians tried to smuggle heroin out of Indonesia in 2005. The ringleaders, 2 of them, were sentenced to death and it caused major controversy in the international community, especially with the Australians.
ReplyDelete