By: Novita Rizky Yunusihtasari

Preliminary

Based on the provisions of Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, it is stated that the State of Indonesia is a State of Law where everything is based on the law and later if there is an action that violates the law, the perpetrator will be subject to sanctions according to the applicable rules. So seeing the many phenomena of massive narcotics illicit trafficking carried out in Indonesia, this shows the low public awareness of the dangers of narcotics use. This is based on the data we have collected from the official website of the Indonesian National Narcotics Agency, which shows that every year the number of narcotics cases reaches 6,128 cases, this means that narcotics trafficking cases are still a serious problem that requires alternative solutions in it.

Highlighting the practice of law enforcement officers in Indonesia, in this case as the authorized party to make efforts, either in the form of preventive actions by conducting socialization related to the dangers of consuming narcotics or taking repressive measures by giving punishments in accordance with applicable regulations. It seems that it has not run optimally, this is due to obstacles that arise either from the community structure or from law enforcement as legal subjects. As is the case in the Supreme Court Decision Number 863/Pid.Sus/2019/PN Stb, where in the decision the abuser is someone who first used Narcotics Category I type shabu-shabu with a net weight of 0.12 grams, the abuser is not proven to be a dealer. because the abuser only uses Category I narcotics, the type of methamphetamine obtained from his partner, and then uses it for himself. In addition, the abuser uses narcotics because he is invited by his colleague, in this case the victim’s partner is a narcotics abuse case (DPO). In this decision, the Panel of Judges decided the case by imposing a prison sentence that the abuser had to serve for 1 year and 2 months without considering medical and social rehabilitation.

In fact, several regulations related to this matter have regulated the procedure for imposing criminal sanctions for narcotics abusers, especially Group I narcotics used for themselves.

Regulations related to the procedure for imposing penalties for narcotics abusers Category I for themselves

The following are some of the regulations that regulate the procedure for imposing penalties for narcotics abusers of Category I for themselves:

  1. Article 127 paragraph 2 of Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics which states that “In deciding cases as referred to in paragraph (1) the judge is obliged to pay attention to the provisions as referred to in article 54, article 55 and article 103 which in these articles contains the following provisions:

Article 54

“Narcotics addicts and victims of narcotics abuse are required to undergo medical rehabilitation and social rehabilitation.”

Article 55

(1) Parents or guardians of Narcotics Addicts who are not old enough are required to report to the public health center, hospital, and/or medical rehabilitation and social rehabilitation institution appointed by the Government to obtain treatment and/or treatment through medical rehabilitation and social rehabilitation. .

(2) Narcotics addicts who are of sufficient age must report themselves or be reported by their families to public health centers, hospitals, and/or medical rehabilitation and social rehabilitation institutions appointed by the Government to receive treatment and/or treatment through medical rehabilitation and social rehabilitation. .

(3) Provisions regarding the implementation of mandatory reporting as referred to in paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) shall be regulated by a Government Regulation.

Article 103

(1) Judges who examine Narcotics Addict cases may:

a. Decide to order the person concerned to undergo treatment and/or treatment through rehabilitation if the Narcotics Addict is proven guilty of committing a Narcotics crime; or

b. Determine to order the person concerned to undergo treatment and/or treatment through rehabilitation if the Narcotics Addict is not proven guilty of committing a Narcotics crime.

(2) The period of undergoing treatment and/or treatment for Narcotics Addicts as referred to in paragraph (1) letter a is calculated as the period of serving the sentence.

Then in article 127 paragraph (3) also explains that in the provisions of article 127 paragraph (1) related to the class of criminal penalties that can be imposed on narcotics abusers Category I for oneself states that “In the case of abusers as referred to in paragraph (1) if they can proven or proven to be a victim of a narcotics abuser, the abuser is obliged to undergo medical rehabilitation and social rehabilitation”.

  1. Supreme Court Circular Number 4 of 2010 concerning Placement of Abuse, Victims of Abuse and Narcotics Addicts into Medical Rehabilitation and Social Rehabilitation Institutions which in the second dictum letter (b) explains that rehabilitation can be imposed on perpetrators who fall into the classification regulated in The Circular Letter of the Supreme Court is as follows:
  • Methamphetamine (Shabu) group weighing 1 gram
  • MDMA (Ecstasy) group with weight: 2.4 grams = 8 pills
  • Heroin group weighing 1.8 grams
  • Cocaine group weighing 5 grams
  • Cannabis group weighing 5 grams
  • Coca leaves weighing 5 grams
  • Mescaline weighing 5 grams
  • Psilosybin group weighing 3 grams
  • LSD (d-lysergic acid diethylamide) group weighing 2 grams
  • PCP (Phencyclidine) group weighing 3 grams
  • Fentanyl group weighing 1 g
  • Methadone group weighing 0.5 grams
  • Morphine group weighing 1.8 grams
  • Pethidine group weighing 0.98 grams
  • Codeine group weighing 72 grams
  • Bufrenorphine group weighing 32 mg

By referring to the regulations governing the imposition of sentences against narcotics abusers Category I for ourselves, we can see that law enforcement practices in Indonesia are still not said to be optimal, looking at the examples of cases where abusers should be obligated to get rehabilitation because they are classified as first-time users of narcotics. Category I is methamphetamine type with a net weight of 0.12 grams and is included in the category of Circular Letter of the Supreme Court Number 4 of 2010 concerning Placement of Abuse Victims of Abuse and Narcotics Addicts into Medical Rehabilitation and Social Rehabilitation Institutions point (a) in which the abuser only brings with a net weight of 0.12 grams, not more than 1 gram, then the abuser is also not proven to be a dealer because the abuser only uses narcotics Category I, the type of methamphetamine obtained from his partner and then used for himself.

Sample case

So if you look at other examples of similar cases, different law enforcement is carried out by seeking rehabilitation for high-class people such as the case of the artist Nunung who was caught at his residence with evidence of one clip of methamphetamine weighing 0.36 grams, 2 small clips used packs of methamphetamine, 3 plastic straws as a tool to use methamphetamine, one bottle that is used for bongs to use methamphetamine. However, Nunung received 9 months of rehabilitation on the recommendation of related parties at RSKO Cibubur, East Jakarta.

Conclusion

From the description of the case and related regulations, which regulate the sanctions given to narcotics abusers of Category I for themselves, we can conclude that the law in Indonesia can still be said to have not reached a good level of effectiveness in fulfilling justice against narcotics abusers, in this case group I for self. If we refer to the opinion expressed by Soerjono Soekanto there are several things that influence in order to achieve effectiveness in law enforcement, these factors include the legal factors themselves, law enforcement factors, infrastructure factors, community factors and cultural factors. So if the five factors have not been able to go hand in hand, then the goal of achieving the fulfillment of community rights in the aspect of law enforcement will not be achieved.

AI

This opinion article was written by Novita Rizky Yunusihtasari, a student of the Faculty of Law of UPN “Veteran” East Java. This article is the author’s personal opinion and does not represent the views of the editors of Yuris Muda Indonesia.