A good mate who is from Indonesia and still has family there has said internal discussions are the regulations when drafted, are most likely to limit the complainant to an Indonesian national. The laws appears to be driven by families disapproving (morally) of lifestyle choices of their family members…not what happens in the bedrooms of foreigners visiting Indonesia.
One can speculate on its application, but when a leading Australian expert puts cold water on much of this speculation, one should take notice.
The Indonesian law gives the head of power, details will be in the regulations which are yet to be drafted (one of the reason for its implementation taking 3 years). As I outlined, the internal on the ground discussions is complainants will be
Only time will tell, along with a national election which could also influence things as well.
We could ask the same of the laws and customs and risks of visiting many other nations as a tourist, SE Asia and elsewhere?
I could ask one of the extended family for a first hand view, or others as ex work mates who follow the dominant religion of Indonesia for comment. The responses will be far from consumer focussed, and likely relate that one nation should not expect another to change to meet the values of another. It’s important to respect difference. It’s the Australian way or have I misinterpreted the more recent discussion as suggesting otherwise?
I think this is a very good move. The West is rapidly sinking under the collapse of marriage and the lack of any expectation of permanent lifelong commitment. The subsequent loss of a stable, safe family home for the children and the terrible consequences the constant breaking up of partnerships has on children is wreaking havoc on our young.
I congratulate Indonesia for trying to do something about it. Australians who who just decided to live together, with no marriage contract, can choose some other holiday destination.
But we have no ayatollahs and morality police to enforce such rulings! How will you ever get the masses to conform to the one true morality? To enforce proper behaviour you will have to find a local equivalent authority, perhaps a call for volunteers would be needed, where would we start looking?
nothing is in black letters at the moment, everything is speculative … and I think this topic (“Is the Indonesian Law change (that hasn’t actually been defined yet) bad for Tourists?”) may have run its course.
If this were happening in Australia, the question that I would be asking about the Regulations is: what is the approval process?
requires an explicit vote by parliament? (can reject or accept)
is a disallowable instrument? (common in Australia - can be vetoed by the Senate but if the Senate chooses to do nothing then whatever **** the minister has written will come into legal force - in theory the House of Reps can also disallow but in a majority government that is most unlikely)
there is no approval process? (will come into legal force unconditionally)
But it is not, hence pure speculation. Even more speculative concerning how Australia might approach similar legislation. Although in very recent history the Aussie Government/s of the day have had little difficulty in making/applying laws for immigration a great many find objectionable and in many instances unequal/unjust. Far more consequential than arbitrary judgements in another nation if they ever apply are less of an imposition.
Consider also our past governments have had had no difficulty supporting legislation and policies to remove children simply because of their parents racial origins. Should we be more concerned about our own nations recent past failings, and more current concerns?
EG An entire election was called to address child protection in Queensland — deaths have almost doubled since - ABC News
There are many more issues demonstrating impact and unacceptable failings for our own citizens - young, adult and older.
The new law "no sex outside of marriage’ and ‘complaint must be from a family member’ raises very important questions. ‘Will a wife be able to complain about her husband having sex with a prostitute’? Who will be jailed, the man or the prostitute? 'Guess who the morality police will condemn?
The majority of the discussion is hypothetical. @grahroll and @phb have said enough of the needs to be aware of differences when visiting other nations.
Other comments offer criticism of difference or rejection of the Indonesian decisions. If that comment belongs, should we first acknowledge our own national shortcomings? Any reflection on the values and political shortcomings of another nation cannot be offered without exposing our own national defects.
Hopefully most still recall the poor behaviour of our own leadership, and lack of fidelity.
There’s potential for a double standard in comments that seek to be critical of Indonesia. Others may see racial and cultural intolerance, aka bigotry. It’s open to moderation to remove the majority of the posts and reduce it to the core discussion that cannot be interpreted as political or religious intolerance.
I would think that it would be whoever is the non-Moslem. If they are both Moslem then the female, as females are oft considered as subordinate to the male (yet are able to rule the male by being able to entice them).
More questions that could be asked are;
Are Australian parents able to lodge a complaint to Indonesian authorities if they disagreed with their adult child and/or partner’s a) lack of marital status, or b) sexual orientation.
What would happen if resident couple’s marriage is not recognised by the moslem authorities (say if they were Bahai, Jewish, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Rosicrucian, or Zoroastrian, etc.), could they be then prosecuted even though there were legally married?
Just as in Australia where we have different state and territory laws, Indonesia has different laws depending on province. What might be acceptable in one is not acceptable in another.
For visitors to Bali, it’s predominantly a Hindu culture. Speculative or hypothetical there are permutations.
Whose partner would not, irrespective of the circumstances. Some partners might welcome any opportunity to call the behaviour to account. It’s not a situation specific to any one nation.
HRW seem to have access to a detailed document, which document has many landmines, mostly for people who live in Indonesia but some for visitors.
Do I put some store in what HRW Indonesia say? Yes. They at least can read/write Indonesian (which is more than can be said for most participants in this topic, myself included, I would guess).
No matter what the exact truth of these changes is … I find it very hard to spin it as being a positive for Australian tourists. It is at best neutral, and that seems unlikely, and more likely negative. It really does seem as if Indonesia has lurched in the direction of being less friendly, under the guise of shaking off its Dutch colonial past.
Yeah, Australia isn’t a perfect country and I’m sure the Australian government would be more measured in any commentary on this topic (would probably make no comment at all) - due to how it would be perceived in Indonesia - but Australian would-be tourists have a right to understand the details of what they would be getting into.
That applies to any foreign country. You can’t obey local laws if you don’t know what they are.
Teuku Faizasyah, a foreign ministry spokesperson, said the ministry summoned the U.N. resident coordinator in Jakarta over the comment, saying the organisation should have consulted with the government before airing its misgivings.
“They should have come to consult, just like other international representatives. We hope they do not hasten to express views, or when there’s not enough information,” he said.
Could be politics on both sides, but are the UN fully informed and whose documents did they look at? Appears they might not ones from the Indonesian government if the Foreign Ministry spokesperson is correct.
The laws future impacts on Indonesians could be as the UN have indicated/assumed…or have a different outcome. In the eyes of many foreigners and if the UN proves to be correct, it could significantly impact local Indonesians, especially those with existing family which have concerns for their family members.
Yet, in relation to tourists, which is the purpose of the thread… today’s news article from the BBC…
Always a fair question, but to be clear … HRW has nothing to do with the UN. HRW is a private organisation (a not-for-profit) advocating for human rights around the world.
won’t be charged
As HRW says, the problem with “won’t be charged” / “selective enforcement” is
a) the law won’t be used … until it is, and
b) it is used to “get” specific people.
The challenge that I would always put to a government (including our own lame government) who says “xyz won’t happen” is: in that case write it into the law
… in other words, so that “xyz can’t happen”.
It wouldn’t be that hard to write into the “bonk ban” that it does not apply to tourists. If a government is never going to use that Article on tourists then what is the objection? Faced with that challenge, governments usually come up with some pathetic excuse about not knowing for sure what situations might arise in the future, blah blah blah … in which case of course they are not in a position to say that the “bonk ban” won’t be used on tourists.
Indonesia is a country of 17000 islands, and is divided into provinces, a number of which are autonomous when it comes to matters of administration and law.
For instance the Aceh province has special status to practice Islamic sharia law.
Bali is a province, majority Hindu, that is largely free to administer the laws in their own way. As it almost totally dependent on foreign tourism for its economy, I would imagine that this new prohibition on sex outside marriage would be ignored.
In 2004, the Australian government, with bipartisan support, banned same-sex marriage AND any recognition of that marriage status from any other countries where it was allowed.
Of course since changed, but only after a plebicite in 2017.
