LOGIC.co.id – In Indonesia, santet, or black magic, is a term that has long been woven into cultural folklore and beliefs, often evoking fear. Santet refers to a form of mystical practice believed to inflict harm on someone from a distance. However, as Indonesia’s legal landscape evolves, a pressing question emerges: how should the law address cases related to santet?
This article explores how Indonesian law handles, regulates, and interprets santet in society, navigating a topic at the crossroads of tradition, modernity, and legal challenge.
What Is Santet and Why Is It So Controversial?
Santet is widely believed to have the power to harm, or even kill, a person remotely. In Indonesian society, particularly in certain regions, santet is seen as a real threat and is deeply feared. Mysterious illnesses or unexplained deaths are sometimes attributed to black magic, creating an atmosphere of suspicion and fear.
Although widely discussed, proving someone’s involvement in santet practices in a court of law is exceptionally challenging. This creates confusion about how Indonesia’s legal system should approach the issue.
The Debate Surrounding Santet in Criminal Law
The idea of prosecuting santet cases within Indonesia’s legal framework has sparked debate for years. Currently, there is no specific law addressing santet practices. Some argue that laws governing santet would benefit those who believe they have been harmed by black magic. On the other hand, others feel that the difficulty of gathering concrete evidence renders such laws ineffective.
For example, in 2013, the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) draft included a provision on santet, proposing that anyone offering santet services or practicing it could face prosecution. However, this draft sparked controversy, as the ambiguous nature of santet made it difficult to prove, and thus, the clause was ultimately removed from the final version of the Criminal Code.
How Does Indonesian Law Address Santet Cases?
Although there is no specific law against santet, certain articles in the Criminal Code can apply to situations involving perceived santet threats. Here are some applicable provisions:
-
Article 378 on Fraud – This article covers fraud cases, which can be applied if someone falsely claims to possess supernatural powers to harm or protect others. If proven fraudulent, the individual may face prosecution.
-
Article 335 on Unpleasant Conduct – This article may apply if someone feels intimidated or threatened by the mention or threat of santet.
-
Article 29 of the ITE Law – Santet threats spread via social media or online platforms can be viewed as digital intimidation or terror, allowing prosecution under Indonesia’s Electronic Information and Transactions Law (ITE Law).
-
Articles on Assault (Articles 351-358) – If a santet threat results in physical or psychological harm, the person responsible could face charges under assault provisions in the Criminal Code.
Santet Cases in Indonesia: Real-World Examples of Legal Challenges
Santet-related cases frequently occur, especially in areas where mystical beliefs remain strong. In some instances, residents suspected of practicing santet face mob violence, as locals attempt to “punish” them. Unfortunately, such cases sometimes end with fatal outcomes for those accused.
For instance, recent years have seen multiple cases in East and West Java, where suspected santet practitioners faced brutal beatings or were even set on fire by fearful communities. These cases highlight the powerful belief in santet, as well as the need for law enforcement to actively educate communities about the importance of legal justice over mob action.
Does Indonesia Need a Santet Law?
Whether Indonesia needs a specific santet law remains a complex issue. On one hand, a law on santet might help support those who feel victimized or threatened by black magic. On the other hand, the difficulty of obtaining scientific evidence makes this type of law vulnerable to misuse and misinterpretation.
Proponents of a santet law argue that even though santet may be challenging to prove, incidents involving threats or accusations should be handled legally, rather than through mob action. On the opposing side, critics argue that proving santet scientifically is nearly impossible, and that enacting a law without concrete evidence could lead to false accusations and wrongful punishment.
Conclusion: The Need for Education and a Balanced Approach
Santet is a deeply rooted cultural phenomenon in Indonesia, one that cannot be dismissed as mere superstition. Even though it’s difficult to prove in legal terms, santet’s impact on social dynamics is undeniable. For now, the government has focused on educating the public to avoid mob violence in response to santet suspicions.
In the long run, a balanced approach in both legal and educational aspects may be essential in addressing santet incidents without misinterpretation or injustice. Public awareness of legal solutions, rather than mob action, is a critical first step in ensuring both safety and justice in these challenging cases.
