Indonesia’s drug laws are Indonesia’s business, says one American expat sensibly:
Nobody who has spent a significant amount of time in Indonesia will make the argument that Indonesia’s legal system is perfect. Corruption is a major problem, and laws ranging from traffic violations to environmental regulations are flouted with impunity. One of my fellow teachers recently confessed that he would never call the police unless he was the victim of a very serious crime because he fears getting shaken down in return for the crime being solved. However, with the exception of the province Aceh, which uses a limited form of Sharia law, Indonesia’s political and legal system is based on secular values[iv] and thus cannot be dismissed as the product of radical Islam, even if critics might have you believe otherwise. Furthermore, there is no doubt whether the aforementioned drug traffickers are guilty, rather the question is if Indonesia has the right to execute foreign drug dealers. Indonesia is well-known for its strict drug laws as its airports are full of warnings that drug trafficking offenses carry the death penalty and even customs declaration cards carry the ominous threat that drug traffickers face the death penalty. Anti-drug signs and speeches are a regular part of life at an Indonesian high school and drugs, even marijuana, are considered completely taboo. Of course, drugs exist and people abuse them, but in my own experience, the Indonesian approach is very different from the West, where many drugs are illegal, but young peoples’ drug experimentation is often tacitly accepted.
I do not believe that drug traffickers should be given the death penalty; however, my opinion is irrelevant as I am not an Indonesian citizen, and even if I were the majority of Indonesians disagree with me.[v] This article is not attempting to argue that countries should adopt the death penalty for drug trafficking, but we should avoid trying to impose our more liberal views about drugs on other countries. Trafficking large amounts of heroin is considered a very serious crime worldwide including in the countries that have abolished the death penalty. The National Institute on Drug Abuse summarizes the effects of the drug as “once a person becomes addicted to heroin, seeking and using the drug becomes their primary purpose in life.”[vi] Hopefully, I do not have to devote any more time persuading the reader that heroin is a terrible drug and that Indonesia has a right to protect itself from drug traffickers. Some pundits have argued that Indonesia should not proceed with these executions because supposedly the death penalty does not deter drug trafficking, but the World Health Organization’s (WHO) 2012 World Drug Report revealed that there is a significantly higher percentage of Australians who abuse marijuana, amphetamine-type stimulants, and opioids (heroin, morphine, etc) than Indonesians.[vii] This makes intrinsic sense as the more serious the punishment for breaking a law the less likely people will do so. Obviously, there are other factors at work here as well, as many countries with less stringent laws have less drug abuse, but Indonesia should be free to combat drug dealers how it sees fit, and even if its methods are inefficient that is Indonesia’s problem, not ours.
According to The Economist’s 2012 Index of Democracy, the only Muslim-majority countries that are functioning democracies are Senegal, Malaysia, and Indonesia.[viii] Unfortunately, this list is unlikely to grow significantly in the future as the Arab Spring has not led to the expected growth in democracy, if anything the opposite has occurred. Thus, it makes sense for the West to do everything in its power to build strong relations and support the aforementioned Muslim-majority democracies, even if they are imperfect. Trying to interfere in a country’s legal system will only have adverse effects, even if the death sentences are commuted, as we risk alienating the Indonesian people, the majority of whom support the death penalty of drug traffickers[ix] and most likely do not want foreign countries interfering in their justice system. This should only be acceptable if there is a real injustice, but facing the consequences after being caught with a large amount of heroin or other narcotics is not an injustice and it is not worth damaging bilateral relations. Bob Carr, the former Australian foreign minister, put it best when he said “to produce a nationalist backlash in Indonesia would be terrible for Australia’s future in Indonesia and I really think in South-East Asia.”[x]
We expect immigrants and visitors to respect our laws, so it seems a little perverse to assume that our citizens will not be held to the same standard when travelling abroad. Indonesia is a much more conservative place than Australia, the Netherlands, etc, so if foreigners find this abhorrent, they should avoid traveling or visiting here, especially if they intend to engage in illicit activity. The only country which should be worried about how Indonesia deals with drug traffickers is Indonesia. Trying to influence domestic policy in other countries through coercion and cajoling may provide a short-term political popularity boost in your own country, but it is not a long-term formula for success, and we must respect Indonesia’s legal system. Otherwise the West risks permanently alienating Indonesia and similar countries by trying to strong-arm them into adopting our legal rules and ethics, which is bad for Indonesia, but even worse for us.”
Australia’s Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is trying everything to get the condemned men’s sentences reduced to life imprisonment, on the rather dubious premise that capital punishment is barbaric, that all human life is precious and has value. Frankly, I doubt if the lady is all that familiar with the ‘all human life is precious’ argument. Why? Because one of her brilliantly thought through proposals to President Widodo of Indonesia is that our two nations do an ‘exchange’. The proposal is that Indonesia gives us back our two Australian drug dealers, and in return we give them three Indonesian ones captured on our soil. Then, our home-grown scumbags can serve a cosy prison sentence here, and the Indonesian scumbags can go home and get shot! Evidently, Miss Bishop’s understanding of the sanctity of life only applies to those holding an Australian passport. As I write, the death toll in Katmandu has climbed over 4,000 following the earthquake on April 25, yet the Australian media and government continue to focus their attention on the fate of the Bali 9 leaders. Where the Hell are our priorities? Virtually every Australian I know has enormous sympathy for the Nepalese people and none for two greedy drug dealers, so why does our media and government continually tell the world the opposite? There are vigils being held around the country, but they concern Nepal not Bali!”
Exactly right. If the “sanctity of life trumps all’ argument were really held seriously, then of course, the US, UK , and Australia wouldn’t be turning away migrants who face starvation and/or war in their own countries.
But they do. Routinely.
In other words, if you are an innocent victim of catastrophe or war, don’t expect the self-proclaimed lovers of liberty to support your right to free movement to other countries. Suddenly Jean Raspail gets trotted out. Europe’s very existence is threatened.
But, if you are a first world drug-trafficker inflicting untold misery on native teens and young people via hard drugs, then expect every bleating phony to rush out and defend the sanctity of life.
No one with half a brain can avoid knowing that they face the death penalty if they traffic in drugs in certain Asian countries. If you still, do it, because you want to make money off of ruined lives, and if a lawfully elected government then sentences you to death, with the support of the culture and people in the country, and there is a legitimate and rational argument to be made that the law in question is just, your legal claim is non-existent.