House Commission III Tells Judges in 2-Tonne Methamphetamine Case: Death Penalty Is Last Resort

House of Representatives Commission III held a special session concerning the death penalty prosecution of a crew member named Fandi Ramadan in a case involving 2 tonnes of methamphetamine. Commission III reminded the panel of judges presiding over the case that capital punishment under the new Criminal Code constitutes a last resort.

“As we know, Fandi Ramadan is a crew member on a vessel where narcotics were found, and as a crew member he has been prosecuted with the death penalty,” said Commission III Chairman Habiburokhman at a press conference following the meeting in the Commission III meeting room at the parliamentary complex in Senayan, Jakarta, on Monday (23/2/2026).

Habiburokhman said the meeting achieved quorum, rendering the decision-making process valid. The results of the meeting will be conveyed to the House leadership for forwarding to relevant parties, including the Batam District Court through the Supreme Court.

Habiburokhman stated the meeting produced several key points. He said Commission III was giving serious attention to the death penalty prosecution of Fandi Ramadan, noting that Fandi was not the principal offender.

“We have obtained information that Fandi Ramadan is clearly not the principal offender, has no criminal record, and had attempted to warn others about the potential for criminal activity,” he said.

He drew attention to the implementation of the new Criminal Code, emphasising that it prioritises substantive, rehabilitative and restorative justice.

“Commission III of the House of Representatives reminds law enforcement officials, including the panel of judges in the Fandi Ramadan case at the Batam District Court, that the new Criminal Code is fundamentally no longer based on a retributive justice paradigm, which treats the law merely as a tool for retribution, but has shifted towards substantive justice, rehabilitative justice and restorative justice — that is, the law as a tool for societal improvement,” he said.

Furthermore, Commission III also stressed provisions in the new Criminal Code stating that the death penalty is no longer a principal sentence. He reminded law enforcement that capital punishment is a last-resort alternative that must be applied selectively.

“Commission III of the House of Representatives reminds law enforcement officials, including the panel of judges in the Fandi Ramadan case at the Batam District Court, that the concept of the death penalty in the new Criminal Code differs greatly from the old Criminal Code,” he explained.

“Under Article 98 of the new Criminal Code, the death penalty is no longer a principal sentence but rather a last-resort alternative that should be applied very strictly and very selectively,” he added.

Habiburokhman said judges are obligated to consider the nature of the offence, the defendant’s mental attitude, and personal history when passing sentence. He said this is stipulated in the new Criminal Code.

“Commission III of the House of Representatives reminds law enforcement officials, including the panel of judges in the Fandi Ramadan case at the Batam District Court, that Article 54 Paragraph 1 of the new Criminal Code stipulates that in sentencing, consideration must be given to, among other things, the nature of the offender’s culpability, mental attitude, and personal history,” he said.

According to the Case Tracking Information System (SIPP) of the Batam District Court, as of Friday (20/2/2026), the trial commenced on 23 October 2025. The case, registered under number 863/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Btm, has continued through proceedings.

In the indictment, prosecutors stated the narcotics distribution was carried out by Fandi together with Hasiholan Samosir, Leo Chandra Samosir, Richard Halomoan Tambunan, Teerapong Lekpradub, and Weerapat Phongwan alias Mr Pong. Meanwhile, another suspect, Mr Tan alias Jacky Tan, is now on the wanted persons list.

Fandi has been prosecuted with the death penalty. Prosecutors believe Fandi violated Article 114 paragraph (2) in conjunction with Article 132 paragraph (1) of Republic of Indonesia Law Number 35 of 2009 on Narcotics.

The case went viral after Fandi’s father, Sulaiman (51), said he could not accept his son being prosecuted with the death penalty. He claimed his son had no knowledge whatsoever of the narcotics smuggling.

“I cannot accept him being prosecuted with the death penalty. This should be thoroughly investigated first. My son knew nothing about this. We are not happy with the prosecutor’s demands — I will not stand for my son being treated this way,” Sulaiman said through tears.