Human Rights Minister Bans Police from Shooting Muggers

A recent dispute has arisen between Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai and prominent lawyer Hotman Paris Hutapea over violent robbery crimes known as begal. Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai has prohibited police from shooting begal suspects on the scene, stating such actions clearly violate human rights. ‘I do not permit shooting without clear legal procedures. Begal suspects must not be shot on the spot,’ Pigai said on May 22, 2026, according to Detikcom. Pigai stated that shooting suspects on the spot fundamentally contradicts human rights principles. Under international law, violent offenders, including terrorists, must be apprehended. Pigai’s remarks were strongly contested by Hotman Paris. The wealthy lawyer, commonly known as Bang Hotman, urged Pigai to exercise empathy before making such statements. ‘Begals are everywhere. You say shooting them violates human rights. Imagine your family or wife being mugged. Would you say shooting them violates rights?’ Hotman said, as reported by Suara on May 22, 2026. In my view, neither of the two figures is wrong; their positions depend on context and situation. Before elaborating further on my opinion, I begin by explaining unlawful acts not punished due to legal justifications. Such acts can be committed by civilians or law enforcement officers, including police. The purpose of law includes maintaining public order, ensuring safety, and protecting human rights. To achieve these, law enforcement officers from the police (Polri), prosecutors, judges, and the military (TNI for national defence) are required. To meet these legal objectives, law enforcement officers carry out preventive measures such as police patrols and take legal action against offenders. Here, we focus on legal action against offenders. The crime in question is begal—street robbers who commit violent theft or forced robbery. Trias Hukum Pidana In criminal law, three key elements exist: (1) criminal acts; (2) criminal liability; and (3) criminal sanctions. These are collectively referred to as the ‘Trias in Criminal Law’ (Topo Santoso, 2023:226). First, criminal acts. Moeljatno defines them as actions prohibited by law and punishable for violators (Hiariej, 225:115). Johan Christoph Gerhard Jonker states that a criminal act is one punishable under law. His broader definition describes it as intentional or negligent conduct violating the law by a responsible individual (Hiariej, p.115). Second, criminal liability. Van Hamel defines it as a normal mental state and competence involving three abilities: (1) understanding the meaning and consequences of one’s actions; (2) recognising that acts conflict with public order; and (3) the capacity to determine one’s will. Thus, those unable to bear criminal liability under this definition include the mentally ill and children. Third, criminal sanctions. ‘Punishment’ can mean (1) penalties imposed on lawbreakers; (2) a judge’s ruling; or (3) the consequence of sentencing (Topo Santoso, 2023:502). Thus, criminal sanctions refer to penalties imposed on those committing criminal acts as described above. Under Article 10 of the old Criminal Code (KUHP), there are two types of punishments: primary penalties—death, imprisonment, detention, and fines—and additional penalties—revocation of certain rights, asset confiscation, and publication of court rulings. The National Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023) outlines similar provisions in Articles 64-69. Unpunishable Criminal Acts First, unpunishable acts regulated by law. Here, two codes are referenced: the old Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 1946), set to expire by end-December 2025, and the National Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023). Types of unpunishable acts, particularly concerning justifiable defence, include coercion (overmacht). Coercion is addressed in Article 48 of the old Criminal Code and Article 42 of the National Criminal Code. Article 48 of the old Criminal Code states: ‘Anyone committing an act under the influence of coercion shall not be punished’. Article 42 of the National Criminal Code states: ‘No person committing a criminal act shall be punished if: (a) forced by irresistible force; or (b) compelled by unavoidable threats or pressure’. Second, self-defence (noodweer). Article 49(1) of the old Criminal Code states: ‘No punishment for acts of self-defence for oneself or others, honour, morality, or property, in response to an imminent unlawful attack’. Self-defence under the National Criminal Code is outlined in Article 34: ’No punishment for those compelled to commit prohibited acts if the act ter