Habiburokhman Serang Balik Hotman Paris, Who Is Critical Of The Article On Alcohol In The Criminal Code: Do You Read The Old Rules? It's The Same

Photo by Adam Wilson on Unsplash

JAKARTA - Member of Commission III of the DPR, Habiburokhman, counter-attacked by the famous lawyer Hotman Paris Hutapea, who criticized Article 424 of the Criminal Code which regulates liquor or alcohol. He was surprised that Hotman had just questioned the alcohol rules in the new Criminal Code, even though the regulation had been in effect since the old Criminal Code.

"How many years has the Criminal Code been in effect for a long time? Since independence. Where is the problem? So far, the issue is not the same as Mr. Hotman Paris Article 300 of the Criminal Code? I asked before whether it was questioned or not?" Habiburokhman told reporters, Monday, December 12. Article 424 highlighted by Hotman Paris reads: (1) Everyone who sells or gives drinks or ingredients that are drunk, shall be sentenced to a maximum imprisonment of 1 (one) year or a maximum fine of category II.

(2) Every person who sells or gives drinks or ingredients that treat children, shall be sentenced to a maximum imprisonment of 2 (two) years or a maximum fine of category II. "Can I ask a little, is the enforcement problematic? How come it seems as if there is an end to this article 424. Mr. Hotman Paris, don't you read the old Criminal Code, don't you see that law enforcement so far?," he continued. According to Habiburokhman, the substance of Article 424 in the Criminal Code is not different from Article 300 in the old Criminal Code. He was also surprised that Hotman questioned the notion of getting drunk and the rules for people who want to add drinks and workers who provide liquor. He even said that the regulation was detrimental to hoteliers at tourist attractions.

"The substance is the same, just think about it with logic, use your brain. People trade with people who are not aware, it's not legal, isn't it? I trade with you, not alcohol, I ask you to buy my cellphone, you are unconscious, isn't it?," he said.

"Moreover, liquor, has it been Article 300 of the Criminal Code for a long time that makes tourists not come to Indonesia? I asked? There is nothing like that, you. So it's filtered like that too. So people don't read, people don't understand, they say, you do," concluded Habiburokhman. Previously, the famous lawyer, Hotman Paris, highlighted three articles in the Criminal Code (KUHP) which the DPR had just legalized on Tuesday, December 6, last. The three articles, namely article 411 on adultery, article 422 concerning kebo gathering and article 424 concerning alcohol.

According to Hotman, of the three controversial articles that are considered the most unreasonable is Article 424 concerning alcohol. The reason, he said, is that the content in Article 424 will actually harm tourism actors, namely restaurants and hotels. In addition, according to him, tourists will be targeted if for example he will buy drinks while traveling in Indonesia. The rules in the article are considered unclear.

"Article 424 is about alcohol, this is what tourists can become targets later. It is stated here that if there are drunk people who are not convicted, but if their friends add more drinks, then the person who adds this will be in prison for 1 year. But the most dangerous thing is that people whose job is to add drinks, go to prison, waitress," said Hotman when in the North Jakarta area, Saturday, December 10. In addition, Hotman said, the meaning of getting drunk in Article 424 also did not have a more detailed explanation. Therefore, according to him, it would be dangerous.

"While the meaning of drunk here is not regulated, whether it's tips or what. This is the most dangerous, if indeed the goal is to prevent drunk people, this threatens all the lives of restaurants and hotels," he said.

Hotman stated that Article 424 concerning alcohol did not make sense. According to him, the article needs to be deleted in the Criminal Code.

"This is an article that I once again say doesn't make sense, there is no legal reason and must be removed from the face of this earth," he concluded.