Crime and punishment

Crime and punishment

I refer to The Jakarta Post May 28 edition where, according to
your table on the front page, possession of 8,175 ecstasy pills
and 5.26 kilograms of cocaine are viewed, respectively, as crimes
of a lesser severity than the alleged "smuggling" of 4.1 kg of
marijuana by Australian Schapelle Corby.

None of the sentences handed down to any of the individuals
listed in that table are relevant to the severity of their
reported offenses or the quantity of narcotics in question.

Where exactly in this country does the line get drawn between
possession with intent to supply and the charge of smuggling? It
surely cannot be relative to the amounts in question, if it was
then Corby should, by rule, be facing a sentence approximately
one third of the seven years Mexican Clara Erlene Umana received
for possession of 15.22 kg of hashish in December 2001.

Must we presume that neither substance nor amount is of
concern to the Indonesian legal system in their pursuit of
prosecution for the possession of narcotics and instead their
only concern is the motive surrounding the possession?

If this "motive over substance type and amount" theory is to
be believed then the authorities here are making matters more
than a little confusing for themselves and anyone else who may
happen to be paying any attention, such as the international
community.

Surely being arrested in possession of 8,000 plus ecstasy
tablets and over five kg of coke qualifies not only as possession
but also as intent to supply as it does in many other countries
worldwide and should carry a penalty more in line with that
handed down to Corby.

How does the Indonesian judicial system explain why the
convicted Italian Juri Angione was sentenced to 15 years for
possession of 5.26 kg of cocaine whilst the Frenchman Michael
Loic Blanc received a ruling of life imprisonment for possession
of only 3.85 kg of the same drug?

It is inconsistencies in rulings such as these that leave the
Indonesian government, its legal system and its international
reputation wide open to criticism. The Australian people have
every right to be outraged at the verdict delivered as I'm sure
would any self-respecting Indonesian citizen if the situation was
reversed.

JAMES CARYS, Jakarta