The Cases Of Sukena And Javanese Landak That Insult Conscience

This is the Javanese hedgehog that Nyoman Sukena kept and made it submitted to the court. (Doc BKSDA Bali)

Nyoman Sukena, a Balinese resident, never thought that saving four Javanghogs would drag him to legal issues. This good intention to care for protected animals does not provide personal benefits, but ends in criminal entanglement. This case is a real example of legal injustice in Indonesia, where people who do not understand the rules often become victims.

After being named a suspect, Sukena explained that she did not intend to trade the animal. As a layman, he does not understand the rules for protecting wildlife. This ignorance leads to severe lawsuits, showing how hard the legal system is to people who are less educated and poor.

This case highlights the irony of legal injustice. Sukena, a simple man, is threatened with punishment only for good intentions. The law should take into account a person's social background and education, not just enforcing the rules regardless of context.

Fortunately, public and media pressure helped Sukena to be free from punishment. This proves that people's voices can influence the course of the law. This case became a widespread discussion, not only because of the legal aspect, but also because of the injustice felt.

Sukena's case should be a momentum for the government to apply restorative justice, an approach that focuses on recovery and education, not just punishment. Instead of punishing Sukena, she should be given education about animal protection. This is more humane and educational than just punishing someone with good intentions.

However, prosecutors prefer a criminal path over education. This raises the question: Has the government socialized the rule of law enough? If people do not understand the law because of lack of education, is it fair to punish them for this ignorance?

This case is not the first. Previously, Grandma Asyani was also convicted of stealing teak wood, although she did not understand the rules. Like Sukena, Grandma Asyani became a victim of a stiff and non-responsive legal system against the reality of society.

The injustice experienced by Sukena and Grandma Asyani should be a lesson for all of us. Laws should protect the weak, not punish them for ignorance. If the law is not able to protect, then it has failed to carry out its functions.

Sukena's release should be appreciated, but not enough. This case must be the starting point for more inclusive and just legal reforms. The government must be active in socializing legal rules, especially in remote areas, so that people who are less educated can understand the law. The restorative justice approach must be a priority, so that justice does not only mean punishment, but also understanding and improvement.

Sukena's case is a reflection of how urgent legal reform is in Indonesia. Society needs to support more inclusive and just legal reforms. Fair legal reform aims to create an open and fair legal system for all levels of society, including those who are less educated. The focus must be on recovery, not punishment alone. This reform aims to eliminate inequality in law enforcement and create equal access and understanding for all citizens.

A restorative justice approach needs to be applied more widely, so that the law does not merely become a tool of punishment, but also educates and corrects. If we do not move for change, legal injustice will continue, and more "Sukena" will become victims.

Good law is a law that protects, not punishment without considering situations and conditions.