Crewman Fandi Should Not Face Death Penalty in Drug Smuggling Case: Legal Expert

RRI.CO.ID, Jakarta – An Indonesian crewman, Fandi Ramadhan, has become a defendant in a case involving the smuggling of nearly two tons of methamphetamine discovered aboard the Sea Dragon vessel. Fandi, who worked as an operational crew member responsible for overseeing the ship's cargo, was charged along with several other crew members of the ship.

A legal expert, Prof. Dr. Henry Indraguna,S.H.,M.H., supports the stance of the Chairman of the Legal Commission at the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR), Habiburokhman, that the death penalty demand against Fandi should not be applied, as it is not aligned with the spirit of criminal law reform. According to him, the death penalty is "not absolute" and should prioritize the principle of ultimum remedium.

According to available information, Fandi is not a drug kingpin. Instead, he is considered a victim, as he allegedly did not fully know that the cargo of several tons being transported on the vessel where he worked consisted of illegal drugs.

He now faces the potential risk of a death sentence if he fails to convince the panel of judges that he was not involved in the narcotics smuggling crime. The Public Prosecutor from the Batam District Attorney’s Office has demanded the death penalty.

During a public hearing with Fandi’s mother, Nirwana, Habiburokhman stated that the demand is inconsistent with the spirit of criminal law reform. The Gerindra Party legislator expressed regret over the prosecutor’s statement implying interference by the House and the public in Fandi’s legal case.

“We are not intervening, but rather supervising to ensure that prosecutors work properly, especially in cases affecting ordinary citizens,” Habiburokhman stated. On the other hand, the Prosecutor’s Office maintains that the death penalty demand is in accordance with the Narcotics Law based on the available evidence.

Responding to public concern over the death penalty threat against Fandi, Prof Henry supported the stance of Commission III of the House, arguing that the death penalty demand contradicts the spirit of the new Criminal Code (KUHP).

“The death penalty must be applied selectively and cautiously, not as a default punishment,” Henry told the media in Jakarta on Friday, 27 February 2026.

The professor and senior lecturer at Sultan Agung University, Semarang referred to Article 98 of the new KUHP, which states that the death penalty is always imposed as an alternative to life imprisonment or a fixed-term imprisonment of up to 20 years. Therefore, prosecutors are obliged to consider mitigating factors, such as the minor role of the defendant.

“This aligns with the criminal law principle of ultimum remedium, meaning ‘last remedy’ or ‘last resort,’ where criminal sanctions should only be applied when other legal measures (such as civil or administrative law) have failed or are insufficient to resolve the case,” Henry explained.

He further underscored that this principle aims to ensure that criminal law is not used as the primary tool, but as a final measure. According to Ultimum Remedium, a legal philosophy concept developed by Cesare Beccaria in his work On Crimes and Punishments (1764), punishment should be the last resort after all forms of prevention have failed, rather than merely an instrument of revenge.

“This approach seeks to prevent abuse and ensure justice for ordinary citizens,” Henry asserted.

He also linked it to Aristotle’s concept of proportional justice. Under this concept, distributive justice differentiates punishment based on the perpetrator’s contribution, making a death penalty demand for a crew member like Fandi disproportionate and unfair given his role.

“What Commission III has done is not intervention, but oversight mandated by Article 20A paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution,” Henry concluded, who also serves as Deputy Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Indonesian Advocates Congress (KAI).