Reyndhart Rossy N. Siahaan, bukanlah orang pertama yang mengalami kriminalisasi karena memanfaatkan narkotika (ganja) untuk kebutuhan medis. Kita ingat di tahun 2017 ada Fidelis Arie yang juga dikriminalisasi karena memanfaatkan tanaman ganja untuk keperluan medis bagi sang istri, ia di vonis penjara selama satu tahun.
Reyndhart Rossy N. Siahaan atau Reyndhart Rossy (37 tahun) sejak 2015 berdasarkan hasil CT Scan Nomor Registrasi RJ1508100084 dari RS OMNI, menderita penyakit kelainan saraf yang membuat badannya sering mengalami kesakitan, sampai 2019 penyakit juga masih dirasakan. Ia terpaksa mengakses ganja untuk pengobatan berbekal dari informasi bahwa ganja dapat meredakan sakit. Reyndhart Rossy ditangkap pada 17 November 2019. Saat ini Reyndhart Rossy masih menunggu putusan dari Hakim.
Sebagai pihak yang berkepentingan terhadap upaya pembaruan hukum, khususnya pembaruan hukum tentang kebijakan narkotika dan penghormatan hak asasi manusia utamanya hak atas pelayanan kesehatan, maka dengan ini, Kami—ICJR, IJRS, LBH Masyrakat dan LeIP berharap hakim pada perkara ini di Pengadilan Negeri Kupang dapat menghadirkan keadilan bagi Reyndhart Rossy yang mederita sakit, mencari pengobatan, namun tak kunjung memperoleh pengobatan yang menghilangkan kesakitannya.
Simak Amicus Curae terkait ganja medis dalam kasus Reindhart Rossy di sini
LBHM, ICJR dan HRI bersama-sama menyusun laporan tentang situasi penegakan hukum dan HAM dalam kasus narkotika di Indonesia. LBHM bersama organisasi lainnya mendapatkan kesempatan untuk melaporkan temuannya ke dalam Rapat Komite HAM yang ke 129.
Dalam laporan ini menyertakan beberapa laporan tentang situasi Hukum dan HAM di Indonesia khususnya dalam isu narkotika seperti:
Hukuman Mati dalam kasus narkotika,
Extrajudicial killing dalam kasus narkotika,
penyiksaan dan perlakuan buruk dalam kasus narkotika,
Hukuman yang tidak proporsional dan situasi pemenjaraan dalam kasus narkotika,
Penahanan dan perawatan wajib,
Perlakuan buruk di pusat rehabilitasi dan kurangnya pemantauan.
Untuk melihat laporan lengkapnya, teman-teman silahkan mengaskes dokumennya di sini
Harm Reduction International, the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR) and LBH Masyarakat (LBHM) welcome the opportunity of reporting to the Human Rights Committee ahead of its adoption of the List of Issues Prior to Reporting for the review of Indonesia, at its 129th Session.
This submission will assess the performance of Indonesia regarding its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), with a specific focus on the country’s drug polic. Regarding:
The imposition of the death penalty for drug offences (Art. 6, 7, 14, 26);
Extrajudicial killings in the context of anti-drug operations and lack of accountability (Art. 2, 6, 7);
Torture and ill-treatment in drug-related cases (Art. 7, 14);
Disproportionate punishment for drug offences, and conditions of detention in prison (Art. 7, 9, 10, 14);
Compulsory drug detention and treatment (Art. 7, 9, 10); and
Ill-treatment in private drug detention centres and lack of monitoring (Art. 2, 7, 9, 10).
Pada tahun 2015, Presiden Jokowi memosisikan kebijakan penanggulangan narkotika ke dalam kerangka perang terhadap narkotika (war on drugs). Institusi keamanan, dalam hal ini BNN dan Polri, menafsirkan narasi keras tersebut dengan gencarnya pengungkapan-pengungkapan kasus narkotika.
Catatan media menyebutkan bahwa sepanjang 3 (tiga) tahun terakhir dimulai pada tahun 2017, BNN mengungkap 46.537 kasus narkotika dan menangkap 58.365 tersangka.1 Pada tahun 2018 terdapat 40.553 kasus yang diungkap Polisi dan BNN yang melibatkan 53.251 tersangka2 , sedangkan pada tahun 2019, BNN, Polri, TNI, Bea Cukai dan Imigrasi merilis sebanyak 33.371 kasus narkotika dan menangkap 42.649 orang.
Selama masa ” peperangan” itu pula, LBHM, Manesty Internasional Indonesia, dan KontraS mencatat adanyanya insiden penembakan dalam penanganan kasus narkotika, sepanjang tahun 2017 terdapat 215 insiden penembakan. Hal ini terjadi dikarenakan pendekatan keamanan yang masih dipakai dalam penanganan kasus narkotika. Dampak lain dari pendekatan keamanan ini ialah Overcrowd penjara di Indonesia, dengan presentasi total penghuni narkotika (Desember, 2019) di penjara sebesar 49,20%.
Munculnya banyak permasalahan dalam penerpaan pendekatan keamanan dalam kasus narkotika, seharusnya membuat pihak keamanan berpikir untuk beralih menggunakan pendekatan yang lebih humanis dalam penanggulangan kasus narkotika.
Permasalahan kematian pada institusi pemasyarakatan agaknya menjadi isu yang tak kunjung selesai dari tahun ke tahun. Sejak 2016, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat (LBHM) telah melakukan monitoring dan dokumentasi media tentang kematian di institusi pemasyarakatan.
Tragedi kematian dalam institusi pemasyarakatan adalah problem yang bersifat repetitif. Pada tahun 2019, terjadi penurunan angka kematian, dari 123 korban (dari 116 kasus) pada tahun 2018 menjadi 66 korban (dari 64 kasus). Penurunan angka kematian tersebut belum tentu menunjukkan perbaikan signifikan pada institusi pemasyarakatan.
Belum lagi kondisi Overkapasitas Penjara di Indonesia yang bukalah situasi yang baik bagi narapidana baik secara sisi kesehatan fisik dan mental, maupun sisi keamanan. Yang akhirnya membuat tragedi kematian di dalam lapas terus ada.
Tahun 2019 sudah dilewati dengan segala permasalahan di dalamnya, tahun 2019 juga bukanlah tahun yang mudah untuk LBHM dan lembaga masyarakat sipil lainnya yang bergerak di isu HAM. Kita menyaksikan betapa konstentasi elektoral di Indonesia telah mengesampingkan Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) dan menumpulkan akal sehat. Di tahun yang sama pula eksekutif dan legislatif bersekongkol untuk meloloskan sejumlah RUU bermasalah, yang akhirnya menimbulkan problematik serta penolakan dari masyarakat, yang dituangkan dalam aksi massa besar di depan gedung DPR RI–brutalitas pun diperlihatkan oleh aparat penegak hukum dalam mengamankan aksi massa yang memakan korban dari rekan-rekan mahasiswa dan masyarakat sipil. Tidak luput juga upaya kriminalisasi terhadap teman-teman aktivis, pembiaran tindakan diskriminasi dan stigma terhadap kelompok rentan masih kerap terjadi hingga saat ini.
Namun, LBHM terus bekerja keras melakukan pendampingan (hukum dan non hukum), menyusun strategi advokasi, terus meneliti, dan memproduksi narasi. Publikasi ini adalah refleksi kerja-kerja LBHM satu tahun kebelakang. Kami menemukan tantangan dan meraih beberapa pencapaian. Semuanya, berkat dukungan pihak-pihak yang telah menudukung jerih payah kami.
Untuk membaca publikasi tentang perjalanan kami sepanjang tahun 2019, teman-teman dapat mengunduh laporan tahunan kami
di sini.
LBH Masyarakat (LBHM) bersama dengan dua lembaga lainnya yakni Institue Criminal for Justice Reformr (ICJR) dan Harm Reduction International (HRI) menyambut resolusi 42/22 dari Dewan Hak Asasi Manusia yang memperbaharui mandat Kelompok Kerja untuk Penahanan Sewenang-wenang (WGAD); dan meminta Kelompok Kerja ini untuk menyiapkan dan menyajikan laporan tentang penahanan sewenang-wenang terkait kebijakan narkotika.
Pengajuan berikut ini memberikan informasi tentang penahanan dalam konteks kebijakan narkotika di Singapura Indonesia, mengikuti struktur kuesioner yang diedarkan oleh WGAD pada 4 Februari 2020.
LBH Masyarakat (LBHM) bersama Harm Reduction International, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, Eurasian Harm Reduction Association (EHRA), International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), International Network of People who use Drugs (INPUD), Release, dan Rights Reporter Foundation, membuat pernyataan sikap bersama melalui Special Rapporteur dan prosedur khusus lainnya tentang adopsi tindakan darurat untuk menanggapi pandemi COVID-19, dan juga mendorong negara-negara tetap mempertahankan penggunaan pendekatan HAM dalam mengatur pandemik ini.
Darurat Covid-19 ini menunjukkan permasalahan yang belum pernah terjadi sebelumnya, terciptanya kerentanan dan memperburuk keadaan yang sudah ada. Salah satunya orang yang menggunakan narkotika yang terdampak dan menghadapi risiko baru seperti kriminalisasi, stigma, permasalahan kesehatan, pengucilan sosial, serta kerentanan ekonomi dan sosial yang lebih tinggi, termasuk kurangnya akses ke perumahan dan layanan kesehatan yang memadai.
Jika hal ini dibiarkan saja tanpa ada penanganan yang baik dan serius, tentunya akan menimbulkan dampak buruk bagi kelompok rentan. Maka dari itu, berdasarkan bukti yang ada, kelompok rentan harus menjadi prioritas dalam respon darurat untuk mengurangi penyebaran pandemik.
Rekomendasi dari Laporan Khusus ini dapat dilihat
di sini.
The legality of sex work in Indonesia can be described, at best, as murky. Whilst not specifically provided for under the criminal code (other than the attempted criminalisation of pimps under Article 296 and Article 506), penal provisions regarding crimes against morality and decency have been interpreted to extend to workers in this industry. Thus, there is a vacuum for sex work to be practiced, despite the cultural and social stigma blatantly present. Sex work occurs in numerous places around the country, most commonly in brothel complexes, or lokalisasi. Recently, members from LBH Masyarakat, a leading human rights organization in Indonesia, went to East Jakarta to meet with sex workers in one such location.
The journey began by talking with the local preman, who is paid 5,000 rupiahs ($.37) per worker per day for “protection”. This was followed by a walk along the train tracks until we stumbled upon the lokalisasi dug out of the earth. Upon descending a makeshift stairwell, we entered into a waiting room that also served as a bar and lounge, surprisingly clean considering its location. Almost as if the rumble of the train overhead was a cue, then entered the women whom we were there with to converse. The purpose of our visit was to inform the workers about their health and legal rights, but more importantly, to be informed by them on what it was they wanted, and ultimately what they needed. Perhaps the most striking element present was the sense of community these workers had with one another. There was a warm family dynamic, full of maternal support from the elders, mockery and familial banter among the younger workers (although no single worker was a child or teenager, which is becoming more prevalent in Indonesia), and a sense of solidarity and support all around.
We have to use stairs to go down.
Our trip enlightened us to the realities of the sex work industry, the lives of those affected by the profession, and about Indonesian society as a whole. The stories that we were told covered a myriad of topics, including police brutality. The legal ambiguity of sex work is routinely extorted by the police and it is common knowledge that officials conduct raids on brothels for the purpose of pocketing bail funds. And it is not just the police: politicians also have been witnessed entrapping sex workers. The women recalled stories of abuse and were received with nods and murmurs of affirmation by the others present. All workers could relate to a tale of coercion or harassment. It almost seemed like the women began trying to outdo the vilest story that had previously been told. One woman recounted a time law enforcement officials stomped on her stomach deliberately until she defecated herself. The sole reason for act: enjoyment by the perpetrator. Other horror stories consisted of workers being accosted by law enforcement on the street, sometimes physically harassing them, poking and prodding them with sharp objects until they acquiesced into stripping. This seemed commonplace, and each recount of abuse was told with an evident lack of hope that the practice would change.
Unequipped for the candor of the women in talking about their lives, we made basic inquiries into the number of shifts the women work daily, the number of working days, and how many guests were received. We were informed that every day was a workday, divided into one day and one night shift and that the latter session was preferred as it attracted a larger number of “guests”. The consensus amongst the workers was that three “guests” were commonly received in a day. It was agreed that the most any individual would be paid by a guest was 200,000 rupiahs ($14.65) and that realistically they could receive as little as 10,000 rupiahs ($.73) for their services. Mitigating factors as to their payment could include race, religion, and age. Women of Chinese descent or of a Christian religious affiliation were handicapped with regard to wages. Similarly, older workers tended to make less money than younger ones. For example, a sex worker over the age of 40 receives a maximum of 45,000 rupiahs ($3.29), thus highlighting the desire for “younger” women. Yet when asked what the diverse group needed, almost in unison they answered “condoms”.
Once every three months, a social worker from the health department comes to test the workers for HIV. If a worker is found to be HIV positive, she is usually banished from the lokalisasi. Not only does she become a pariah to the establishment, but without access to proper treatment or medicine, she poses a threat of transmission to others and to society at large.
Our first visit to prostitute place, and We provide legal counseling to sex work.
The universal account from these women is that they had travelled from afar to the big city Jakarta in hope of a better life, most commonly from small towns around Java and Sumatra. Some of the women made the trek themselves, others were delivered by relatives. The underground back alley where we sat was their final destination, clearly so far from their aspirations of a prosperous life.
Friendly, funny, and familial. These are the words we would use to describe the workers we met. All the women were chatty and willing to tell their story with full transparency and openness, juxtaposed to their literally underground and ultimately clandestine place of work. The irony that the government wants nothing to do with this profession publicly, yet secretly use workers in this industry privately, is not lost on us. And although last year was supposed to see the abolishment of localised sex work in Indonesia, it is apparent this profession is not going anywhere.
What can be done to help sex workers in Jakarta and Indonesia? Contraceptives should be priority one. This includes allowing outreach workers to not be harassed when delivering condoms and contraceptives during routine visits to lokalisasis. Not only will contraceptives help curb infectious diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, but also decrease the chance of any unplanned pregnancies. This may seem like common sense, nevertheless, the Indonesian government prohibits family planning services to provide contraceptives to unmarried couples. Moreover, with some police forces in Indonesia going out of their way to confiscate condoms, it is perturbing to think of how inaccessible these contraceptives might be in the near future. Adding to this dire situation is that the Jokowi administration wishes to “update” the penal code, with amendments that include prohibiting sex outside of marriage (although it has been currently halted due to public outcry), and the situation seems even more pessimistic with regard to sex workers in Indonesia.
With condoms selling at an average price of 20,000 rupiahs ($1.46), these items considered essential by the Western world are often too expensive at a local convenience for the average person. Aside from the hefty price tag, Indonesian cultural customs and societal expectations often negate the opportunity for individuals to purchase contraception. Furthermore, only last year the government wanted to prohibit the advertisement of contraceptives, and further criminalise the non-medical sales of condoms, making their future accessibility even more uncertain. This is sharply contrasted with Western countries where sex education and access to health care, especially with regard to contraceptives, are considered the norm.
From a human rights perspective, access to sufficient health care should be considered a priority. As was reported to us, sex workers are often denied proper treatment for their basic needs due to the reputation of their profession. Furthermore, many of the women do not have state or federal identification cards, thus denying them access to government insurance. With such a low daily income, it is impossible for individuals to pay out of pocket for medications that would greatly improve their quality of life.
It is very difficult to escape the issue of morality when discussing sex workers in Indonesia. One can pontificate if the perception of sex workers will change in the near future, or if violence against women in this industry will abate. These questions are hard to answer when from nearly all angles (social, religious, political and economic) there exists a shadow over the women and men who make a living in this industry. For many in Indonesia, sex work is considered a moral offense, and therefore, elicits a negative response from society. It is important to remember that whilst sex workers are considered to be aliens on the fringe of society, in reality, their practice is woven into the lives of the political, the powerful and the pious.
Group photo before we left the prostitute.
Will Doran and Natasha Slater are interns at LBH Masyarakat. Will recently finished his Master’s degree at SOAS, University of London, while Natasha is currently a law student at the University of Adelaide.
Praktik Tembak Mati di Tempat dalam kasus narkotika di tahun 2017 menjadi diskursus yang hangat dibicarakan di dalam ruang publik. Di tahun berikutnya isu ini mulai surut dalam gegap gempita menjelang kontestasi pemilihan presiden dan wakil presiden periode 2019-2024. Sekalipun isu ini surut di tahun 2018, Namun, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat (LBHM) tetap konsisten melakukan pemantauan dan dokumentasi media dalam jaringan (daring) terkait praktek tembak di tempat terhadap seseorang yang diduga melakukan peredaran gelap narkotika. Berdasarkan pemantauan media daring yang LBHM lakukan, pada tahun 2018 terdapat penurunan jumlah kasus tembak di tempat yaitu sebanyak 159 kasus, dengan jumlah korban total 199 orang.
Tindakan sewenang-wenang ini telah mencoreng Indonesia sebagai negara hukum, Penegasan Indonesia sebagai negara hukum tercantum dalam Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia tahun 1945 (UUD 1945) yang dirumuskan pada Pasal 1 ayat 3 yang menyatakan, “Negara Indonesia adalah negara hukum”. Dalam konteks kehidupan bernegara, gagasan negara hukum menekankan pada prinsip supremasi hukum atas orang, dan bahwa pemerintah terikat oleh hukum.
Berangkat dari situ LBHM menilai jika praktek ini menciderai hukum di Indonesia yang memegang teguh prinsip ‘asas praduga tak bersalah’, sebagaimana kami sampaikan dalam laporan terdahulu. Mereka yang mendapatkan penghukuman harus melewati proses peradilan pidana. Sayangnya, korban tembak di tempat yang meninggal tidak pernah menjalani proses tersebut.
Untuk melihat laporan lengkapnya silahkan unduh di sini.
