Human Rights Concerns Rise as Death Sentences persist

Despite not carrying out an execution as July 2016, Indonesian courts are still actively issuing death sentences, raising concerns among human rights organizations. Amnesty International Indonesia, on April 8, 2025, reiterated its call for the Indonesian government to implement a moratorium on all executions adn commute the sentences of those on death row. This appeal reflects a global movement away from capital punishment, yet Indonesia’s stance remains firm, creating a point of contention on the international stage.

We urge law enforcement in Indonesia to follow the global trend by officially declaring a moratorium on all executions and commuting the sentences of all individuals on death row,
wirya Adiwena, Amnesty International Indonesia Deputy Director

The U.S. debate on capital punishment frequently enough centers on issues of justice, deterrence, and cost. States like Texas and Oklahoma continue to carry out executions, while others, like Illinois and New Jersey, have abolished the death penalty. The contrasting approaches within the U.S. mirror the global divergence, with Indonesia standing out for its continued imposition of death sentences despite a lack of actual executions.

Drug Offenses Drive death Sentences

A notable portion of the death sentences handed down in Indonesia are for drug-related offenses. Data from 2024 revealed that 86% of the death sentences issued where for these crimes. This focus on drug offenses as capital crimes is especially noteworthy given the global discussion around drug policy, with many countries moving toward decriminalization and treatment-based approaches. The American experience with the “War on Drugs” offers a cautionary tale; despite decades of aggressive enforcement, drug use and addiction remain significant problems. The high cost, both financially and in terms of social impact, has led to a re-evaluation of drug policy in many U.S. states.

Notable Cases and International Implications

Several specific cases highlight the ongoing application of the death penalty in Indonesia. For example, on March 6, 2025, judges at the Medan District Court in North Sumatra sentenced an individual to death in a narcotics case. Furthermore, on March 17, 2025, prosecutors at the Kabanjahe District Court, also in North Sumatra, sought the death penalty for three defendants accused of murdering a journalist and three family members. These cases underscore the consistent application of capital punishment within the Indonesian legal system.

The cases of Mary Jane Veloso from the Philippines and Serge Atlaoui from France, both previously facing execution in indonesia but later returned to their home countries, demonstrate a complex interplay of legal and diplomatic factors. While the Indonesian government might present these repatriations as gestures of goodwill, Amnesty International views them critically. “The repatriation of foreign death row inmates is only a partial move and does not indicate a shift in Indonesia’s overall stance on the death penalty,” said Wirya Adiwena.

Impact of New Criminal Code

Indonesia’s new Criminal Code (KUHP), slated to take effect in January 2026, continues to include the death penalty. Although it will no longer be considered the primary punishment,its presence in the legal framework signals a continued endorsement of capital punishment. This decision aligns Indonesia with countries such as China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, which are among the leading executioners globally. For Americans, this positioning invites reflection on the U.S.’s own standing on capital punishment. While the U.S. has substantially decreased executions in recent years, it remains an outlier among Western democracies.

The debate surrounding the death penalty in the U.S. often involves ethical, legal, and practical arguments. Proponents argue for its deterrent effect and its role in delivering justice for heinous crimes, citing cases like the Oklahoma City bombing. Opponents,however,point to the risk of executing innocent individuals,the disproportionate impact on marginalized communities,and the high costs of capital punishment compared to life imprisonment. These arguments also resonate in the international context, influencing the dialog around Indonesia’s policies.

Fresh Insights and Analysis

While Indonesia’s reluctance to abolish the death penalty is frequently enough framed within a context of national sovereignty and legal tradition, deeper analysis suggests that political considerations also play a role. Maintaining a tough stance on crime, especially drug-related offenses, can be a popular position with some segments of the population. This parallels the history of “tough on crime” policies in the United States, which, while popular in certain eras, have also led to mass incarceration and disproportionate penalties.

Another outlook to consider is the influence of international norms and human rights standards. While Indonesia may resist external pressure to abolish the death penalty, the ongoing scrutiny from organizations like Amnesty International and the United Nations can still exert influence. Public awareness campaigns and diplomatic efforts can play a crucial role in shaping public opinion and encouraging policy changes. The U.S. experience with civil rights movements demonstrates the power of sustained advocacy in driving social and legal reforms.

Potential Counterarguments

A common counterargument to abolishing the death penalty is the assertion that it serves as a deterrent to crime. Some argue that the fear of execution prevents individuals from committing violent acts,particularly drug-related offenses. Though,empirical evidence on the deterrent effect of the death penalty is inconclusive. Studies in the U.S. and other countries have failed to demonstrate a clear link between capital punishment and reduced crime rates.Moreover, opponents argue that life imprisonment without parole provides a sufficient level of punishment and incapacitation, eliminating the risk of executing innocent individuals.

Another argument in favor of the death penalty is the concept of retribution, suggesting that it provides a just punishment for heinous crimes and offers closure to victims’ families. While the desire for justice and closure is understandable, critics argue that the death penalty perpetuates a cycle of violence and fails to address the root causes of crime. They advocate for a more restorative justice approach, focusing on rehabilitation, reconciliation, and addressing the underlying social and economic factors that contribute to criminal behavior.

Conclusion

Indonesia’s continued issuance of death sentences, despite a de facto moratorium on executions, presents a complex and troubling picture. As the country prepares to implement its new Criminal Code in 2026, the debate over capital punishment is likely to intensify. The U.S., with its own internal divisions on the death penalty, can offer both cautionary tales and potential strategies for reform. Ultimately, the path forward will depend on ongoing dialogue, evidence-based policymaking, and a commitment to upholding human rights.