I have read that if someone was to check into a drug rehabilitation center in Indonesia they have to list themselves as a drug addict but then have immunity from being procecuted for listing themselves as a drug addict.

If someone were to check themselves into a drug rehabilitation center in Indonesia, and registered themselves a "drug addict" would they be immune from openly stating that they use drugs?

It seems that article 128 of narcotic laws speak like this: http://www.flevin.com/id/lgso/translations/JICA%20Mirror/english/4868_UU_35_2009_e.html

Article 128

(3) Narcotics addicts that are old enough as referred to in Article 55 paragraph (2) are currently undergoing medical rehabilitation 2 (two) times the period of medical treatment in the hospital and/or medical rehabilitation institutions designated by the government was not sentenced.

I am not exactly sure what it means. Does that mean anyone can just report that they are addict and got a free license of using illegal drugs?

This article suggest https://www.translatetheweb.com/?ref=TAns&from=&to=en&a=https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/baca/lt595f3a8c67506/pecandu-narkotika-yang-tidak-dapat-dituntut/


Some of my friends told me that too.

  • "Of course, most drug users are not really addicted. Most illegal drugs are not addictive" There is a lot of evidence in the world to discount that claim... Meth, cocaine, etc are extremely addictive drugs.
    – Ron Beyer
    Sep 5, 2019 at 21:05
  • 80% of meth users are not addicted. They used it like once every 6 months.
    – user4234
    Sep 6, 2019 at 8:51
  • Your question is unclear. You write that "If they get caught by cops they cannot be prosecuted." Prosecuted for what? I would assume drug trade is still punished, and just being addicted is not a crime in itself, so I assume you mean that consumption and/or possession is not prosecuted? Please edit to clarify what you are asking.
    – sleske
    Sep 6, 2019 at 8:56
  • Also, could you add a short summary and/or quotes from the article you linked, to explain the claims from the article. It is fairly long, and also in Indonesian, while this site's language is English.
    – sleske
    Sep 6, 2019 at 8:57
  • done I did it. Is it good enough. I put a bit longer summary because that's what's essential
    – user4234
    Sep 6, 2019 at 9:33

1 Answer 1


The official clause in question is here:

Pecandu Narkotika yang telah cukup umur sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 55 ayat (2) yang sedang menjalani rehabilitasi medis 2 (dua) kali masa perawatan dokter di rumah sakit dan/atau lembaga rehabilitasi medis yang ditunjuk oleh pemerintah tidak dituntut pidana

which unofficially says

Narcotics addicts who are old enough as referred to in Article 55 paragraph (2) who are undergoing medical rehabilitation with at least two treatments by doctors in hospitals and / or medical rehabilitation institutions designated by the government shall not be not criminally prosecuted

where the italicized part involves some interpolation – a professional legal translator could have a better English rendition. The point is that you have to actually be getting treatment, and it has to be at a facility that is approved (ditunjuk) by the government. Such addicts are not criminally "dituntut", which could cover being charged, indicted, prosecuted or sued, a minor ambiguity resolved by the fact that the prosecutor is the "penuntut umum" (same root word). Under the law, it is not sufficient to just register (report yourself), you have to actually be receiving treatment.

The part about "was not sentenced" is just a mistake.

  • was not sentenced is not a good translation. More like not criminally prosecuted. You're right. How does it work in practice? Can a guy register as addict and avoid prosecution? That's really the main question. If yes, then why not?
    – user4234
    Sep 6, 2019 at 17:54
  • So it seems that the answer is true
    – user4234
    Sep 22, 2019 at 14:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .