President Joko Widodo and the House of Representatives do not need to force codification in deliberating the Criminal Code Bill, if even its substance is causing problems.
By
·3 minutes read
President Joko Widodo and the House of Representatives do not need to force codification in deliberating the Criminal Code Bill, if even its substance is causing problems.
The Criminal Code (KUHP) has indeed been an obsession for all presidents and justice ministers. The existing Criminal Code is a colonial legacy that must be rewritten. However, revising the Criminal Law does not need to be forced, let alone in a codified format. A criminal law must be designed to be long-lasting and forward-looking, so enforcing measures against a specific crime becomes less realistic, as crimes can change rapidly.
In reality, the attempt to codify or enact a sapujagat (comprehensive) law by combining general and special crimes in a single volume has provokes resistance from state institutions.
The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) have objected to the inclusion of corruption and human rights violations in the draft Criminal Law. The KPK objects to the substance of corruption in the Criminal Code Bill. The KPK and civil society are afraid that, the inclusion of corruption in the Criminal Law will soften the extraordinary crime of corruption. There is also an analysis that the very existence of the KPK, which was born out of the May 1998 reform wave, will end in due course. The punishments for corruption in the Criminal Code Bill and Corruption Law also differ.
Komnas HAM has objected to the Criminal Code Bill for setting a 20-year statute of limitations on crimes against humanity and for not accommodating retroactivity. With the inclusion of the clause on past human rights abuses, outdated cases will not be reopened for investigation.
The government is trying to ensure that there will be no weakening of the KPK. However, it is difficult for the public to accept its promise, because the reality shows that political efforts to weaken the KPK are continuing.
President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo must take into account the objections of the two state commissions. Legal politics is in the hands of President Jokowi, and the legislation is part of legal developments that the President must preside over himself. There needs to be a future vision as to how President Jokowi will declare Indonesia\'s laws, which have been increasingly empowering the community. Legal development is as important as infrastructure development.
If President Jokowi still insists on passing the revised Criminal Code during his term, it is better to remove special crimes from the bill. There is no need to force codification. However, the substance of public crimes that have the potential to give room to criminalization through rubber articles that can entangle civil society, including the press, should be reviewed again. The Criminal Code Bill should strengthen civil society, rather than strengthening the state. There must be a balance!