Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

age of consent

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • age of consent

    Is the age of consent in Indonesia 15 or 16?

    http://www.unodc.org/res/cld/documen...minal_Code.pdf
    according to this criminal code , it appears to be 15. (Article 287)

  • #2
    Um...why do you need to know?

    Comment


    • #3
      I noticed there might be a mistake on the Age of consent page of wikipedia.

      Comment


      • #4
        not sure where you got that document and how official it is (it has several typos on the same page as the article in question), but it seems pretty straight forward:

        Article 287
        (1) Any person who out of marriage has carnal knowledge of a woman whom he knows orreasonably should presume that she has not yet reached the age of fifteen years or, if it is notobvious from her age, that she is not yet marriageable, shall be punished by a maximumimprisonment of nine years.
        (2) A prosecution shall be instituted only by complaint, unless the woman has not yet reached theage of twelve years or one of the cases of Articles 291 and 294 is present.



        Edit:
        I'd be highly skeptical of this document, search for the term "rupiah" and look at the fines. They range from 300 rupiah (2 US cents) to 10,000 rupiah (less than $8). This document is probably from 30+ years ago when those amounts may have actually been significant.
        Last edited by R Cameron; 23-10-15, 22:38.

        Comment


        • #5
          This is the law

          http://hukum.unsrat.ac.id/uu/kuhpidana.htm#b2_14

          "[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial] Barang siapa bersetubuh dengan seorang wanita di luar perkawinan, padahal diketahuinya atau sepatutnya harus diduganya bahwa umumya belum lima belas tahun, atau kalau umurnya tidak jelas, bawa belum waktunya untuk dikawin, diancam dengan pidana penjara paling lama sembilan tahun.[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial][FONT=Arial][SIZE=2](2) Penuntutan hanya dilakukan atas pengaduan, kecuali jika umur wanita belum sampai dua belas tahun atau jika ada salah satu hal berdasarkan pasal 291 dan pasal 294."


          So the age of consent is 15, but only for age 11 and under, will there be a prosecution, unless a complaint is made, or the child was a servant, student or child of the person.[/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR]

          Comment


          • #6
            I am wondering under which law Philip Robert Grandfield was prosecuted for sex with 16 and 17-year olds in 2008??

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by dennisr35 View Post
              I am wondering under which law Philip Robert Grandfield was prosecuted for sex with 16 and 17-year olds in 2008??
              I don't remember the details of the Granfield case but it makes no doubt that it were UU 23/2002 tentang perlindungan anak (child protection act). Article 82 would have my guess and I would be very surprise if the prosecutor wouldn't have backed up the charges with one or two articles of the "Kejahatan terhadap kesusilaan" chapter of the KUHP. Pasal 289 and 292 come to mind for example.

              For the record, under the Childhood Protection Act, a child is anyone under the age of 18.

              Please note that UU 23/2003 has now been abrogated and replaced by UU 35/2014 (but a the definition of child is still the same).

              May I kindly ask you what is the purpose of your research?
              Last edited by atlantis; 25-10-15, 06:26.

              Comment


              • #8
                oh, so you do have an agenda.

                the law above applies to sex with women. This man had sex with men, and that is covered, not by article 287, but by article 292:

                "[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]Orang dewasa yang melakukan perbuatan cabul dengan orang lain sesama kelamin, yang diketahuinya atau sepatutnya harus diduganya belum dewasa, diancam dengan pidana penjara paling lama lima tahun."

                Adults who commit obsecene acts with members of the same sex, who are known, or should be known, to not yet be adults, shall be punished with up to five years in prison.

                The question of an adult is defined, for these purposes, in law number 23, of 2002, concerning child protection, which defines a child as someone under the age of 18 years.

                [/FONT][/COLOR]http://www.kemenpppa.go.id/jdih/peraturan/uu%20no%2023%20tahun%202002.pdf

                This law defines some offences:

                Article 82
                "Setiap orang yang dengan sengaja melakukan kekerasan atau ancaman kekerasan, memaksa,melakukan tipu muslihat, serangkaian kebohongan, atau membujuk anak untuk melakukan ataumembiarkan dilakukan perbuatan cabul, dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling lama 15 (lima belas)tahun dan paling singkat 3 (tiga) tahun dan denda paling banyak Rp 300.000.000,00 (tiga ratus jutarupiah) dan paling sedikit Rp 60.000.000,00 (enam puluh juta rupiah)."

                Any person who deliberately inflicts violence or threats of violence, force, deceit, lies, or persuades a child to commit or permit obscene acts, shall be published with a prison sentence of between three and fifteen years [and a fine of between 60 million and 300 million rupiah]

                The boys were reported to have been paid, so I guess this would be come under 'persuading'.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by sumyunggai View Post
                  [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]
                  The question of an adult is defined, for these purposes, in law number 23, of 2002, concerning child protection, which defines a child as someone under the age of 18 years.
                  [/FONT][/COLOR]
                  Just for the sake of accuracy, as I said in #7, UU 23/2002 ha been repelled. One should look at UU 35/2014 which is the current relevant statute when it comes to Child Protection matters.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by atlantis View Post
                    Just for the sake of accuracy, as I said in #7, UU 23/2002 ha been repelled. One should look at UU 35/2014 which is the current relevant statute when it comes to Child Protection matters.
                    This offence was tried in 2009 though, so the 2014 law won't be of much interest.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by sumyunggai View Post
                      This offence was tried in 2009 though, so the 2014 law won't be of much interest.
                      I was talking about accuracy concerning child protection as it is seen today. Not about the Granfield case. If you read #7 I believe that you will find that I refer to UU 23/2002 for the Granfield case but note that this law is not current anymore. This is to avoid that, people who would be interested by this question of age of consent, which is the topic of the thread in the OP, don't get directed to the wrong statute.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by atlantis View Post
                        I was talking about accuracy concerning child protection as it is seen today. Not about the Granfield case. If you read #7 I believe that you will find that I refer to UU 23/2002 for the Granfield case but note that this law is not current anymore. This is to avoid that, people who would be interested by this question of age of consent, which is the topic of the thread in the OP, don't get directed to the wrong statute.
                        Actually UU 23/2002 is still in force, UU 35/2014 does not repeal it.

                        E.g., article 78 of the 2002 law remains in force:

                        "Setiap orang yang mengetahui dan sengaja membiarkan anak dalam situasi darurat sebagaimanadimaksud dalam Pasal 60, anak yang berhadapan dengan hukum, anak dari kelompok minoritas danterisolasi, anak yang tereksploitasi secara ekonomi dan/atau seksual, anak yang diperdagangkan, anakyang menjadi korban penyalahgunaan narkotika, alkohol, psikotropika, dan zat adiktif lainnya (napza),anak korban penculikan, anak korban perdagangan, atau anak korban kekerasan sebagaimanadimaksud dalam Pasal 59, padahal anak tersebut memerlukan pertolongan dan harus dibantu, dipidanadengan pidana penjara paling lama 5 (lima) tahun dan/atau denda paling banyak Rp 100.000.000,00(seratus juta rupiah)."

                        There is a new Chapter 11A, among other changes, which defines various prohibitions, against children. With regard to child sex, the main change is 76I:

                        "Setiap Orang dilarang menempatkan, membiarkan, melakukan, menyuruh melakukan, atau turut sertamelakukan eksploitasi secara ekonomi dan/atau seksual terhadap Anak."

                        Everyone is prohibited from placing, allowing, causing, instructing to, or participating in the economic and/or sexual exploitation of children

                        This compares with

                        "Setiap orang yang mengeksploitasi ekonomi atau seksual anak dengan maksud untuk menguntungkandiri sendiri atau orang lain,"

                        Everyone who exploits a child economically or sexually with the intent to benefit themselves or others

                        at article 88 in the 2002 law.


                        So the old law appeared to defined child sexual exploitation as something intended for economic benefit, whereas the new one does not.

                        In terms of the OP's original question, 'what is the age of consent', it appears to be:

                        * man having sex with woman - she must be 15 years old, he can be any age
                        * man having sex with man, or woman with woman - both must be aged 18 or over
                        * any kind of sexual act with a prostitute - the prostitute must be at least 18.

                        The exploitation angle would cover most cases of foreign men, and women, with boys and girls aged under 18, in practice. Although there doesn't seem to be a specific prohibition of sex acts with women against young boys apart from this.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by sumyunggai View Post
                          Actually UU 23/2002 is still in force, UU 35/2014 does not repeal it.
                          oops... You are absolutely correct. Apologies to be misleading. UU 35/2014 is only an amendement. For some reason I was lead to believe that they abrogated UU 23/2002 and replaced it by a new statute.
                          Thank you for correcting it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by atlantis View Post
                            I don't remember the details of the Granfield case but it makes no doubt that it were UU 23/2002 tentang perlindungan anak (child protection act). Article 82 would have my guess and I would be very surprise if the prosecutor wouldn't have backed up the charges with one or two articles of the "Kejahatan terhadap kesusilaan" chapter of the KUHP. Pasal 289 and 292 come to mind for example.

                            For the record, under the Childhood Protection Act, a child is anyone under the age of 18.

                            Please note that UU 23/2003 has now been abrogated and replaced by UU 35/2014 (but a the definition of child is still the same).

                            May I kindly ask you what is the purpose of your research?
                            How do you know that it's under UU 23/2002

                            He may be prosecuted under KUHP 292. Age of consent for homosexual activity is 18

                            There are laws against heterosexual consensual sex on article 82. However, it's not quite clear.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by sumyunggai View Post

                              Actually UU 23/2002 is still in force, UU 35/2014 does not repeal it.

                              E.g., article 78 of the 2002 law remains in force:

                              "Setiap orang yang mengetahui dan sengaja membiarkan anak dalam situasi darurat sebagaimanadimaksud dalam Pasal 60, anak yang berhadapan dengan hukum, anak dari kelompok minoritas danterisolasi, anak yang tereksploitasi secara ekonomi dan/atau seksual, anak yang diperdagangkan, anakyang menjadi korban penyalahgunaan narkotika, alkohol, psikotropika, dan zat adiktif lainnya (napza),anak korban penculikan, anak korban perdagangan, atau anak korban kekerasan sebagaimanadimaksud dalam Pasal 59, padahal anak tersebut memerlukan pertolongan dan harus dibantu, dipidanadengan pidana penjara paling lama 5 (lima) tahun dan/atau denda paling banyak Rp 100.000.000,00(seratus juta rupiah)."

                              There is a new Chapter 11A, among other changes, which defines various prohibitions, against children. With regard to child sex, the main change is 76I:

                              "Setiap Orang dilarang menempatkan, membiarkan, melakukan, menyuruh melakukan, atau turut sertamelakukan eksploitasi secara ekonomi dan/atau seksual terhadap Anak."

                              Everyone is prohibited from placing, allowing, causing, instructing to, or participating in the economic and/or sexual exploitation of children

                              This compares with

                              "Setiap orang yang mengeksploitasi ekonomi atau seksual anak dengan maksud untuk menguntungkandiri sendiri atau orang lain,"

                              Everyone who exploits a child economically or sexually with the intent to benefit themselves or others

                              at article 88 in the 2002 law.


                              So the old law appeared to defined child sexual exploitation as something intended for economic benefit, whereas the new one does not.

                              In terms of the OP's original question, 'what is the age of consent', it appears to be:

                              * man having sex with woman - she must be 15 years old, he can be any age
                              * man having sex with man, or woman with woman - both must be aged 18 or over
                              * any kind of sexual act with a prostitute - the prostitute must be at least 18.

                              The exploitation angle would cover most cases of foreign men, and women, with boys and girls aged under 18, in practice. Although there doesn't seem to be a specific prohibition of sex acts with women against young boys apart from this.
                              "The exploitation" and "persuasion" angle is not very clear to me. So sex with a girl above 15 is legal unless you "exploit" or "persuade" her to do so. Can anyone shows actual court cases?

                              It seems that actual court cases for this sort of thing is very few.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X