Preventing The Health Bill From Becoming A Discriminatory Regulation, AMTI Asks The DPR To Protect The Sustainability Of The Tobacco Ecosystem

JAKARTA - Starting the process of formulating the Draft Law (RUU) on the Omnibus Law on Health, the Indonesian Tobacco Society Alliance (AMTI) assesses that the current polemic cannot be separated from the substance of regulations that do not fully accommodate the rights of the community to obtain quality, fair, and without discrimination health services.

As one of the stakeholders in the tobacco sector which is also regulated in the Omnibus Law on Health, AMTI sees that the bill is prone to threatening the sustainability of the tobacco ecosystem. Especially related to the Regulation of Addictive Substances, in Part Two Puluh Lima.

"From the beginning, the element of the tobacco ecosystem as part of the community was not accommodated by his voice to provide input related to the Health Bill. This Health Bill was made very executive and discriminatory to the upstream and downstream elements of the tobacco ecosystem," said Secretary General of AMTI, Hananto Wibisono in a Media Discussion on Organizing the Bill on Executive and Discriminatory Regulations on the Tobacco Ecosystem, Wednesday, April 12.

In substance, Article 154 concerning the Regulation of Addictive Substances, according to Hananto, positions tobacco as equal in one group as narcotics and psychotropic substances. In fact, tobacco as a national strategic commodity is a legal product that contributes significantly to state revenue.

"Obviously, the products, the activities of the workers, are all legal. Tobacco has contributed significantly to the development of this country but in the Health Bill it is treated like drugs. This is injustice and discrimination. Our hope is that the people's representatives, the DPR RI, can help oversee the Health Bill as really as possible and fairly as possible," said Hananto.

He continued, tobacco has long been a mainstay of society as a support for life. There are 6 million workers, ranging from the plantation, manufacturing sector to the creative industry that depends on the tobacco ecosystem.

"Again, in the process of formulating regulations, the stakeholders of the tobacco have never been involved. Of course, this situation hurts millions of people who depend on their livelihood in the tobacco ecosystem," said Hananto.

From a legal point of view, Ali Rido, Lecturer in Law at Trisakti University, considered that Article 154 concerning the Regulation of Additive Substances in the Omnibus Law on Health should focus on regulating tobacco in its own domain.

"Settings should be distinguished because the nicotine content in tobacco is not the same as drug addictive substances. I see this Health Bill encourages, smoothing the way for the 'deletion of tobacco' slowly," he explained.

In fact, continued Ali Rido, that the Government's Opinion in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 34/PUU-VIII/2010 emphasized: "Maccomau settings and products containing tobacco aim to secure their consumption, not eliminate tobacco or products that contain tobacco. The law only carries out "safety and protection of health, not prohibition".

He also emphasized that based on the Constitutional Court Decision No. 6/PUU-VII/2009, that the government's opinion is "Judging from the addictive side, nicotine (smoking) lies parallel to caffeine and is not at the same level as opium, cocaine, marijuana,subsigen, or various substances throughout the hyponotics so that regulation regarding cigarettes has never been equalized with regulations regarding narcotics and illegal drugs. Coffee, tea and chocolate which contain caffeine are also addictive substances".

In addition to Article 154 concerning the Security of Addictive Substances, AMTI considers that Article 157 regarding Non-Smoking Areas (KTR) is also very excessive.

"In Articles 157, articles 2 and 3 related to Non-Smoking Areas, emphasize that Regional Governments Must Implement KTR. These mandatory words are closely related to the juridical implications (regulation and application of sanctions) for the implementation of the KTR itself," said Hananto.

Regarding the substance related to the KTR, Ali Rido also assessed that the main emphasis related to sanctions was only on smokers. Not on agencies that fail or do not apply KTR.

"Criminal sanctions only target smokers. Then what about managers, organizers, or persons in charge of workplaces, public places, and other places that do not provide special places for smoking? They are not subject to sanctions. This actually shows excessive sanctions and is not in line with the determination of criminal sanctions with Modified grocery Method which is adopted by the New Criminal Code," added Ali Rido.