NM case : Mindboggling law enforcement Pandaya  ;  A staff writer at The Jakarta Post

                                               JAKARTA POST, 20 Desember 2015

                                                                                                                                                           

                                                                                                                                                           

Prostitution may be illegal in Indonesia, but the way the police handle high-profile cases of alleged celebrity prostitutes and their pimps prove that the situation is much more complicated than we may have realized. The case that the police are building from the arrest of two suspected pimps, identified as O and F, at an upscale hotel in Central Jakarta is a case in point. The police call it a human-trafficking case, while people in the street see it simply as a regular case of high-class prostitution that was brought to light to entertain people tired of the conflict among the nation’s political elite. In the wee hours one night, officers posing as wealthy clients booked two call girls, identified only as NM and PR, for a rendezvous. As the story later unfolded, police said their actual targets were the pimps. People began to sense something funny: The officers were extremely friendly with the pimps. Up to now, police have kept a tight lid on the pimps’ identities, while the women’s were immediately leaked to the public after they were taken to a social rehabilitation center in East Jakarta, like prey for the hungry infotainment reporters.  The women’s names, which were initially a source of speculation on social media, were confirmed after a lawyer claiming to represent Nikita Mirsani spoke out and Nikita herself held a press conference to tell her version of the story. PR, who is said to be a 2014 Indonesian beauty pageant finalist, has opted to keep a low profile. This differential treatment in favor of the pimps has given the police a bad name. Police vehemently stick to their guns that the case was purely a human-trafficking case and that they were treating the pimps as the perpetrators and the women as “victims”. So why on earth didn’t they put the women under protection, instead of exposing them to the media’s prying eyes? That is where the complication begins. The government claims that prostitution is illegal, but the police, the backbone of law enforcement, have time and again showed us that’s not entirely true. The simple question is why the police have only applied the Human-Trafficking Law and targeted only the pimps as the ones who “exploit the women for financial gain” — an assumption that has met with widespread skepticism. Reza Indragiri Amriel, a forensic psychologist, says that Nikita and PR were consenting adults and do not qualify for “victim” status according to the definition stipulated in the 2007 Human-Trafficking Law. “The law […] states that a victim is one who endures physical, mental, sexual, economic or social suffering as a result of human trafficking,” Reza said as quoted by kompas.com. “I don’t think NM fits the definition. I think like many other women, NM willingly worked as a prostitute.” The “victim” status conferred on NM and PR also baffles Yenti Garnasih, an expert on money laundering, because the women and their clients had agreed on the amount of money to be paid for the sexual services, as police revealed. The pimps’ lawyers also claimed that it was NM and PR who wanted to work under O and F’s management. The use of the Human-Trafficking Law as the sole legal basis has provoked suspicion that the police mean to protect the women’s clients. As the women charge between Rp 50 million and Rp 65 million for each three-hour session, it is assumed that many of their clients must be exceptionally rich and powerful men, such as politicians, government bureaucrats and business people. Usually, the authorities prosecute prostitution cases under the Criminal Code (KUHP), Article 296 of which states that “Anyone who willingly makes or facilitates indecent acts with others, and makes it a habit and profession, is subject to a maximum of 16 months’ imprisonment and/or a fine of Rp 15,000.” If the raid was intended as part of efforts to combat human trafficking and prostitution, the police should also use Jakarta Bylaw No. 8/2007, which was drafted as the implementation guideline to the KUHP. It appears that the KUHP, a Dutch colonial legacy that has yet to be amended, prescribes that only a person running a venue of prostitution — not the prostitutes or their clients — are liable to prosecution. That’s why every region reserves the authority to draft its own implementational bylaws regarding prostitution. The 2007 Jakarta bylaw prescribes criminal prosecution for “people who make, persuade and facilitate others to become commercial sex workers and/or subscribe to sex workers’ services”. Offenders are liable to a minimum 20 days’ and maximum 90 days’ imprisonment, as well as a fine of at least Rp 500,000 and Rp 30 million at the most. Were the police serious about combating prostitution, they could also use the Information and Electronic Transaction Law, a stretchable law that has been used to charge people who misuse the internet to slander others. And what about the Pornography Law?  The latest case promises to be another mindboggling legal morass, as with an earlier case against pimp Robby Abbas. Robby was convicted of running a prostitution syndicate involving celebrities and other high-class call girls, but only he was ever charged. The cases bear a similarity: The undercover stings were conducted at a time when public attention was on political dramas of national proportion. Robby, along with celebrity Amel Alvi, was arrested at the height of the conflict between the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the National Police, while O, F, NM and PR were stung in the wake of the Freeport scandal. If it’s a case of coincidence, then it may be a case of one too many. ●