TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - If the executions of inmates convicted of drug-related crimes were simply aimed at creating sensationalism and popularity, then the government has achieved its goal. But the 'benefits' derived from this cheap politicking have resulted in a significant disadvantage. President Joko Widodo has turned Indonesia into a sadistic nation.
Just look at the global reaction to this policy. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon even said that there is no place for the death penalty in the 21st century. There have been strong reactions from other countries. Australia, which withdrew its ambassador from Jakarta, was stunned by the deaths of its citizens, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, who were shot along with six other condemned inmates at Nusakambangan last week.
The other prisoners who suffered the same fate were Rodrigo Gularte (Brazil), Zainal Abidin (Indonesia), and four Nigerians, Martin Anderson, Raheem Agbaje, Sylvester Obiekwe Nwolise and Okwudili Oyatanze. This was the second series of executions following the shooting of five foreigners and one Indonesian convicted of drugs offences in January. One inmate, due to be shot, Mary Jane Veloso, escaped the firing squad after the Philippine president asked for a stay of execution because the prisoner was still needed to testify as a witness in a human trafficking case.
President Jokowi has repeatedly used the excuse that the death penalty is still necessary because of the harm that drugs are doing to this nation, and that every day, 50 people die as a result of narcotics. In other words, the Jokowi administration believes that shooting a few drug dealers can be justified if it saves 18,000 drugs victims a year. Jokowi gained domestic political popularity because this policy is supported by almost every political party and major organizations.
At first glance, this thinking makes sense, but it is, in fact, weak. It ignores the far better alternative of saving the lives of thousands of drug victims while still respecting the lives of drug criminals. Drug dealers and smugglers could be jailed for life and made impoverished. All their assets believed to derive from crime could be seized by the state. These funds could then be used for narcotics eradication programs and a massive anti-drugs campaign.
The death penalty is an unseemly policy. If it is aimed at giving shock therapy, then the priority should be the major drug dealers, not their couriers like Mary Jane, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran. One example of a very dangerous drug dealer is Freddy Budiman, who was sentenced to death in 2013 for producing 1.4 million ecstasy pills. Freddy is still able to control his narcotics business from behind bars, and has not been executed. And strangely, he has dyed his hair red, which as a convict he should not have been allowed to do as it could be seen as an effort to disguise himself.
The government should be consistent. Although justice positively includes the death penalty, Indonesia is a nation that values human rights. Article 28-A of the 1945 Constitution clearly states that every person has the right to life and the right to maintain his or her life and livelihood. These rights are also guaranteed by Law No. 39/1999 on Human Rights and Law No. 12/2005 on the Ratification of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights.
This international convention does not completely forbid the death penalty in states that ratify it, including Indonesia. However, the death penalty must be imposed by courts that are competent and credible. In this context, our courts are well short of that standard. Many drug dealers who should have been sentenced to death have received lighter sentences, while people who acted as couriers have become the victims.
The Jokowi administration should consider the world reaction and the worsening image of Indonesia, which is being seen as a barbaric nation. At a time when many countries have abolished the death penalty because it has been ineffective in reducing crime, Indonesia has announced waves of executions. There are still around 50 people on death row awaiting their turn.
President Jokowi must impose a moratorium on executions because of the disadvantages they bring. After all, there is no evidence that the shootings carried out since January have made drug dealers surrender and repent. President Jokowi will set this nation back in terms of upholding human rights if he continues to exhibit cruelty in shooting convicted drug criminals.
Jokowi's reasoning that he is showing 'consistency' in executing prisoners to defend the sovereignty of the nation seems contrived. What kind of sovereignty is upheld by killing people? (*)
Read the full story in this week's edition of Tempo English Magazine
