Realising a Just Narcotics Policy
Jakarta (ANTARA) - Every 26 June, the world commemorates International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking (IDADA) as a momentum to strengthen collective commitment in facing the threat of narcotics.
This year, the National Narcotics Board (BNN) has adopted the theme “Building a Healthy, Intelligent, and Strong Generation Through the Ananda Bersinar Movement Towards Golden Indonesia 2045.” This theme serves as a reminder that the war against narcotics is not merely a law enforcement agenda, but an effort to protect the quality of Indonesian human resources as the foundation for Golden Indonesia 2045.
This urgency is not without reason. The prevalence of narcotics abuse in Indonesia has reached approximately 2.11 per cent of the population aged 15–64, equivalent to 4.15–4.9 million people. At the same time, more than 312,000 students have been recorded as exposed to narcotics abuse.
Throughout the year, law enforcement agencies have also uncovered tens of thousands of narcotics cases, with seized evidence reaching hundreds of tonnes. These figures demonstrate that narcotics remain a serious threat to public health, social resilience, and the future of the nation’s generation.
The magnitude of this threat does not necessarily mean that all perpetrators should be viewed with the same approach. Data from the National Criminal Information Centre (Pusiknas) of the Indonesian National Police even shows that narcotics abuse cases are more frequent than narcotics trafficking cases.
This fact serves as a reminder that narcotics policy should not only prioritise a repressive approach but must also be able to differentiate proportionally between users who require recovery and traffickers who seek profit from crime. This is where the importance of realising a narcotics policy that is not only firm but also just becomes evident.
Users and traffickers
The eradication of narcotics must indeed be carried out firmly. However, firmness must not ignore the principle of proportionality in criminal law. Users and traffickers are two legal subjects with different characters, motives, and levels of danger. Traffickers profit from the illicit drug trade, whereas users—particularly addicts and victims of abuse—are more appropriately viewed as individuals in need of health interventions, in addition to legal accountability.
This paradigm has essentially been accommodated in Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics. Article 54 emphasises that addicts and victims of narcotics abuse are required to undergo medical and social rehabilitation, while Article 103 grants judges the authority to order rehabilitation.
Nevertheless, implementation still presents challenges. In law enforcement practice, users are frequently charged under Article 112 of the Narcotics Law regarding the possession or control of narcotics, which carries relatively heavy criminal penalties.
On the other hand, Article 127, which specifically regulates narcotics users for personal use, is not always the primary basis for handling cases. This situation has the potential to blur the distinction between users and traffickers, even though both have different levels of culpability and intent.
This issue has also drawn the attention of the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR). In discussions regarding the Draft Law on Criminal Justice Adjustment, the ICJR has proposed that sentencing be structured more proportionally by clearly distinguishing between users and traffickers.
Such an approach is not intended to loosen the eradication of narcotics, but rather to ensure that users who meet the criteria as addicts or victims of abuse receive rehabilitation as mandated by law, while producers, kingpins, and traffickers—as the primary actors in the criminal chain—face heavier criminal accountability.