Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies

Abstract

Cannabis use has never posed major problems in Indonesia, yet prohibitionist policies prevail. Despite the high prevalence of cannabis use, local or national discussions on cannabis policies are nearly non-existent, exacerbated by strong anti-drug views and public institutions' failure to design and implement comprehensive policies based on evidence.

Full text

Cannabis in Indonesia
Dania Putri and Tom Blickman1
DRUG POLICY BRIEFING | 44 | January 2016
Patterns in consumption, production, and policies
Key Points
•Traditional use of cannabis in Indonesia has mainly been found in the northern part of
Sumatra, particularly in the Aceh region. Restrictions in production, use and distribution
of cannabis were initiated by the Dutch colonial government in the 1920s following
international actions on cannabis control.
•Cannabis is the most widely used illicit substance in Indonesia, with approximately two
million users in 2014. Under the current narcotics law cannabis is included in the most-
restrictive Schedule I list, along with substances such as heroin, and crystal meth or
shabu. Penalties for cannabis-related oences are comparable to shabu- or heroin-related
oences, in spite of the common perception that cannabis is less harmful.
•The ambiguous nature of the narcotics law often triggers the victimisation of cannabis
users who are either falsely accused as dealers, or have limited or no access to legal
support during legal proceedings. Entrapment and extortion by law enforcement and
security ocers are widespread.
•Government attempts to alleviate prison overcrowding by sending users to rehabilitation
centres have triggered many criticisms, mainly due to their problematic methods (such
as forced urine tests and breaches of patient condentiality) and the questionable
eectiveness of mandatory rehabilitation programmes, especially as the majority of
cannabis users do not develop problematic use.
•Decriminalizing use, possession for personal use and small-scale cannabis cultivation
for personal use may help resolve various issues ranging from prison overcrowding to
extortion of users by law enforcement ocers, and may also free up human and nancial
resources to tackle problematic use.
ideas into movement

2 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
In 2014, Indonesia’s National Narcotics Board (Badan Narkotika Nasional –
BNN) reported that there were around two million cannabis users in the
country, making cannabis the most commonly used illicit drug in Indonesia,
followed by amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) such as methamphetamine
(shabu) and ecstasy.2 In Indonesia, cannabis is ocially referred to as ganja,
although dierent local terms may apply in dierent parts of the country.
Almost all cannabis consumed in Indonesia is produced in the Aceh region on
the northern-most tip of Sumatra, as well as several other parts of Sumatra,
from where it is transported to the rest of the country. A small amount may
also be cultivated in and transported from Garut, West Java, as well as Papua,
according to the cannabis advocacy agency Circle of Cannabis Archipelago
(Lingkar Ganja Nusantara or LGN).
According to the Indonesian Drug Users’ Network (PKNI), despite being
categorised as a Schedule I drug (i.e. a highly dangerous substance with
no medicinal value), many drug users consider it less harmful compared
to other illicit substances, especially more addictive drugs such as heroin.
Nonetheless, because of the increasing anti-drug stance of the Indonesian
government and its zero-tolerance approach towards drug use, cannabis
use has rarely been discussed as a single topic, or as a plant with signicant
cultural, traditional, and potential medical uses in the country.
Because of the current anti-narcotics law – discussed in detail in the nal
section of this brieng – there have been many obstacles to research
on cannabis, both in terms of medical and anthropological research.
Consequently, most information concerning the cultural and traditional use
of cannabis in Indonesia was obtained through local interviews, testimonies,
and research in Dutch archives,3 unless stated otherwise. Diculties
in verifying these pieces of information also arise from the signicant
importance of religious and traditional beliefs of certain populations in
Indonesia.
According to the Historical Dictionary of Indonesia, Cannabis sativa or ganja
“was native to the Caspian Sea, but reported from Java in the 10th century”.4
The dictionary suggests that cannabis was used as a source of bre and
an intoxicant, although its use was not as common as the consumption of
tobacco, opium or betel.5 Ganja or bang, as noted by a number of Dutch
authors during the colonial period, served as an “intoxicating agent” whose
leaves were regularly mixed and smoked with tobacco, particularly in the
Aceh region.6
Frequently known as a substance that generated appetite and simultaneously
functioned as a substitute for opium, it was also reported that chopped
cannabis leaves were sometimes soaked in water, dried, rolled in nipa
palm leaves and smoked as cigarettes. Stronger eects were said to have
Historical overview of cannabis use in Indonesia

3 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
occurred when the dried cannabis leaves were wrapped in corn or banana
leaves.7 Similar descriptions of cannabis were also written in the report The
Useful Plants of the Dutch East Indies, in which the species Cannabis sativa was
registered.8
Commonly grown in the north of Sumatra, several documents suggest that
the cannabis plant was also grown in other parts of the Dutch East Indies
such as in Batavia (Jakarta), Buitenzorg (Bogor) and Ambon. It appears
that during the late 19th century, cannabis was not well known among the
Javanese populations, yet there were assumptions that the plant might have
been cultivated on the island because of local familiarity with terms such as
ganja, gandja, or gendji.9 Apparently, cannabis leaves and opium were used
by shopkeepers or warung holders (in Indonesian, warung is a common term
for a small shop or eating place) to enhance the aroma and narcotic eect of
dried tobacco in banana leaves.10 Indonesian-born citizens preferred much
stronger tobacco than the Dutch and did not shy away from its mind-altering
eects.11
The cultivation and use of cannabis in Ambon, on the other hand, was
documented by the German-Dutch botanist, G. E. Rumphius, who wrote
about the recreational and medicinal application of Cannabis indica – and
Cannabis sativa to a lesser extent – in his book Herbarium Amboinense
(published in 1741). Although cannabis cultivation in the Indonesian
archipelago was said to be less common than it was in the Indian mainland,
cannabis was still grown in Ambon with seeds from Java. In the region,
cannabis roots were consumed to treat gonorrhoea, while its leaves were
sometimes combined with nutmeg and brewed as tea for the purpose of
alleviating asthma, pleuritic chest pain and bile secretion. Furthermore,
cannabis tea, prepared with dried cannabis leaves, was recreationally
consumed to enhance the sense of well-being which local populations
referred to as hayal, similar to the modern Indonesian word khayal (a state of
imagination or fantasy). Rumphius observed that among Muslims, cannabis
leaves, which were smoked with tobacco, produced eects varying from
aggression to sadness and melancholy.12
In the late 19th century, advertisements for cannabis occasionally appeared in
several Dutch language newspapers in the Dutch East Indies, most of which
attempted to promote cannabis cigarettes as remedies for illnesses ranging
from asthma, coughing and other throat illnesses, breathing diculties and
13
Cannabis roots were
consumed to treat
gonorrhoea, while its
leaves were sometimes
combined with nutmeg
and brewed as tea for the
purpose of alleviating
asthma, pleuritic chest
pain and bile secretion

4 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
sleeplessness. It is important to note, however, that these advertisements
were primarily directed towards the European populations residing in the
Dutch East Indies, considering the common medical usage of cannabis in
Europe at the time.14
Traditional, religious and spiritual relevance
In the Aceh region, local populations reported important uses for cannabis,
ranging from cooking and/or food preparation, to mixing with coee or
for making herbal remedies for diabetes.16 In terms of cooking and food
preparation, Acehnese people use cannabis seeds to enhance avour,
moisture, and to a lesser extent colour (for example in local dishes such
as goat curry and Acehnese noodles). Besides being mixed and smoked
with tobacco, cannabis owers are sometimes soaked in palm wine, kept in
bamboo branches and consumed as a tonic.
While there is very little research or literary work carried out on the topic
of (traditional) cannabis use, most local respondents in Aceh, when asked
about cannabis, referred to several holy books such as Mujarabat and Tajul
Muluk, which provide religious grounds for medicinal use of cannabis. These
holy books, translated from ancient Malay in the 16th century, suggest that
the cannabis plant is a crucial herbal remedy for various sicknesses such as
diabetes.17
First prohibitions of cannabis
Concerns over Indian hemp (as cannabis was often referred in earlier
centuries) were raised at the International Opium Conference in 1912 in The
Hague. An addendum to 1912 International Opium Convention was added
in which “[t]he Conference considers it desirable to study the question of
Indian hemp from the statistical and scientic point of view, with the object
of regulating its abuses, should the necessity thereof be felt, by international
legislation or by an international agreement.” 18 Consequently, the colonial
government instructed Willem G. Boorsma, Head of the Pharmacological
Laboratory of the Department of Agriculture, Industry and Trade in the Dutch
East Indies, to examine the situation of cannabis in the Dutch East Indies.19
The study conducted by Boorsma does not show signicant problems in
15

5 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
relation to cannabis use in Indonesia (widespread consumption was largely
limited to Aceh and East and West Sumatra, while small-scale cultivation
for personal use mainly took place among communities from the Indian
mainland referred to as Bengalese and Clingalese – also known as Klings – in
these areas).20 As a result of the study, no measures were introduced to stop
cannabis cultivation but increased scrutiny was decided upon which required
the head administrators of the regions where the plant was found to report
annually on the situation. Nevertheless, in practice, preconditions were set
when leasing land that forbade the cultivation of all plant-based psychoactive
substances, including Indian hemp, without authorisation from the colonial
government.21
However, because of international developments and more importantly
rising support for introducing further restrictions on cannabis, the Dutch
government decided to restrict access to cannabis in the Dutch East Indies
through the adoption of the Verdoovende Middelen Ordonnantie (narcotics
decree) of 1927 – this was a result of the inclusion of cannabis in the 1925
International Opium Convention and made cannabis subject to a system
of export authorisations and import certicates.22 The primary focus of the
decree was the consumption and production of opium, and more specically
concerning the opium monopoly in the Dutch East Indies. Cannabis was often
used as an opium surrogate.23 Even before the nation-wide narcotics decree
was passed, similar legislations were already implemented on the provincial
or local level, including in the Aceh region in 1924, in which the cultivation,
possession, storage, transport and sale of cannabis were punishable with
a ne of 100 guilders.24 Cannabis-related arrests, ranging from cultivation
to recreational consumption, began to increase during the 1930s – the very
period in which colonial authorities advanced their law enforcement eorts.25
To what extent is cannabis available, accessible, and consumed in Indonesia on
the present day?
Between 2009 and 2012, 37,923 people were imprisoned for using cannabis,
meaning that as many as 26 people were sentenced on a daily basis.26 As the
most common choice of substance among drug users, cannabis accounts for
up to 66 per cent of the entire drug consumption in the country.27 In 2011,
there were an estimated 2.8 million cannabis users in Indonesia, while the
estimated number of drug users in Indonesia was around 3.7–4.7 million, or
approximately 2.2 per cent of the total population aged 10–59 years. Of those
users, approximately 1.1–1.3 million used crystalline methamphetamine,
around 938,000 to 969,000 used ecstasy, and roughly 110,000 used heroin.28
However, cannabis has hardly ever been discussed as a separate type of
substance, even though recent developments on cannabis legalisation,
regulation, and decriminalisation in the Americas have been reported on
various media platforms.
Overview of current cannabis use in Indonesia
The primary focus of
the decree was the
consumption and
production of opium,
and more specically
concerning the opium
monopoly in the Dutch
East Indies. Cannabis was
often used as an opium
surrogate

6 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
Cannabis cultivation and the political insurgencies in Aceh
The illicit cultivation of cannabis in Aceh province has been associated with the separatist
group Free Aceh Movement (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka or GAM), which has been active since the
late 1970s in pursuit of an independent Aceh. Besides the practice of extortion, kidnapping,
unlicensed logging and sale of timber and gathering funds from the Acehnese diaspora, GAM
allegedly nanced itself by levying taxes on cannabis cultivation and controlling tracking
in cooperation with a Jakarta-based tracking organisation. In 1988, a GAM sub-district
commander was arrested and reported to have showed hectares of cannabis elds connected
with the funding of GAM operations, although there have been doubts about the validity of
these ‘confessions’. In response to these allegations, the Indonesian military was ordered
to carry out the Nila I Operation in 1989, a military operation which appeared to aim for the
abolition of GAM and the cultivation of cannabis in Aceh. Subsequent attacks by GAM were
deemed as forms of retaliation towards such eradication programmes by the Indonesian
authorities.29
Nonetheless, it is important to note the signicant involvement of the Indonesian security
forces within the conict as well as within the issue of cannabis tracking itself, which should
be seen as a phenomenon separate from the escalation of conict in Aceh. The security forces
– military and the police – were reported to have promoted cannabis cultivation in rural areas
and purchased cannabis from farmers at much lower prices than on the black-market. As an
example, a police helicopter pilot was arrested after ying with 40kg of cannabis which he
admitted was to be sent to the police chief of Aceh Besar regency, while in 2002, an army truck
was intercepted carrying 1,350kg of cannabis through Binjai, North Sumatra, which resulted
in a re-ght between the police and military in which six police and one soldier were killed. 30
Apparently, the eorts to reduce illicit cannabis production were not very successful; in 2004,
an estimated 30 per cent of cannabis in South East Asia came from Aceh.31
The relationship between the Free Aceh Movement and the illicit cultivation of cannabis
in Aceh is hard to determine. Viewing illicit cannabis cultivation and the GAM as the two
main variables in the conict is problematic, as there is no concrete evidence that the two
are connected, not to mention the complex nature of the conict itself in which certain
key Indonesian military commanders were involved in selling weapons and ammunition to
the GAM. Cannabis was just one of the forms of resource-grabbing taking place. The local
coee and shing industries were extorted as well, while the military were also involved in
seizing plantation land for companies and silencing locals to prevent them from reclaiming
their land.32 More likely all parties in the complicated conict – military and police, dierent
competing GAM factions, local warlords, criminal gangs and corrupt political and criminal
entrepreneurs – were involved one way or another in shifting alliances.33 Because of the high
level of insecurity and instability in the conict situation, rural farmers and cannabis growers
dependent on cannabis cultivation for their livelihoods were the most disadvantaged among
all the parties involved, as they have been harassed by armed groups controlling territories in
which cannabis cultivation takes place.

7 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
While Indonesia’s anti-narcotics law technically allows the use of cannabis
for restricted scientic purposes (in relation to medical purposes), it appears
that there have been few or no ocial research programmes in relation
to cannabis in the country. According to LGN, several cannabis plants
have actually been cultivated in Tawangmangu, Central Java. Although
being administered by the ocial research body of the Ministry of Health
(Balitbangkes), these plants have primarily been used to provide assistance
for law enforcement purposes, and hence have no scientic relevance.
A cannabis user’s testimony
Rudi34 (aged 23) rst experienced ganja when he was about 14 years old. It was mainly
curiosity that encouraged him to try out his older cousin’s marijuana cigarettes, and he only
started to purchase and consume cannabis regularly in high school, primarily because of
increasingly easy access to illicit substances. When asked about his habitual consumption
of cannabis, Rudi asserts it has not caused any major harm, and instead considers cannabis
a source of creativity, especially when it comes to dealing with university-related writing
assignments. More importantly, he nds cannabis has a signicant therapeutic value in
relation to the frequent tremor on his hands, whose symptoms are often alleviated through
smoking cannabis.
Arrested in 2011
One day Rudi was on his way from Bogor (West Java) to Yogyakarta (Central Java), a city where
he obtained his degree. His initial plan was to bring several cannabis joints from Bogor, yet
instead, he decided to buy a few grams of ganja from the local dealer in Yogyakarta. When he
reached home, a police ocer knocked on the door and came in to arrest him; it turned out
that local dealer was already under arrest and had been ‘persuaded’ to sell out his customer.
Rudi was then brought to a hospital nearby for a urine test, and like other drug-related
suspects, he was beaten up by police ocers. Subsequently, a deal was oered to Rudi; the
police would remove his cannabis-related charges in exchange for a certain amount of money.
After accepting the oer, Rudi went back to university the following day, “as if nothing ever
happened”.
‘Trust no one’ and be self-sufcient
Since the day he got entrapped, arrested and released through bribery, Rudi started to
become more cautious with regard to his cannabis use. More importantly, Rudi began to
think that it would be much safer for him to grow his own cannabis, becoming more self-
sucient in producing cannabis for his personal use and not having to rely on dealers or
runners. Rudi asserts that after being deceived by his dealer, it is better to “trust no one”. He
now cultivates eight cannabis plants on his balcony in Bogor, despite its illegal status. Rudi
believes that it is necessary for the Indonesian government to re-examine the laws concerning
cannabis use, particularly in relation to its medical applicability and potential to alleviate many
people’s suering. In addition, he hopes to witness an erosion of stigma with regard to the
consumption of cannabis, the main choice of psychoactive substance among drug users in
Indonesia.

8 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
Cultivation of cannabis
While the Aceh region is still known to be the main source of cannabis, there
are several other parts of Sumatra where cannabis is cultivated illicitly for
commercial purposes: Bengkulu (West Sumatra province), Lampung province,
and Mandailing Natal (North Sumatra province).
According to interviews and observations carried out by the BNN, on
the other hand, cannabis in West Borneo also ‘comes from Java, while in
Jayapura, Papua, cannabis ‘is transported from Papua New Guinea”.35 It is
also important to note that an increasing number of regular cannabis users
have chosen to be less dependent on the illicit supply chain by growing their
own cannabis plants.36
Cannabis plantations in the aforementioned parts of Sumatra normally
would not exceed an area of one hectare. As many cannabis farmers are
not landowners, they pay rent for the land on which they cultivate cannabis,
while some farmers simply start cultivation on an empty, unused piece
of land. Supposedly for strategic reasons, cannabis farmers sometimes
abandon their land after the harvesting season and switch to another piece
of land. In Aceh, it is also common for local households to grow several
cannabis plants in their own backyard, although the yields are often not sold
for commercial purposes. Because of the illegal status – and not to mention
the hefty penalties – of cultivating cannabis, many cannabis farmers seek
and/or receive protection from the Indonesian military (Tentara Nasional
Indonesia) primarily through bribery.
Distribution and pricing
On average, a cannabis farmer in Aceh would sell a kilogram of cannabis for
approximately Rp 300,000 ($22). In Medan, the capital of North Sumatra,
local dealers would buy this bag of cannabis for approximately Rp 1,500,000
(US$110). Once it reaches Jakarta, the country’s capital, the wholesale price
could be more than twofold ($220) or ten times the price paid to the grower,
and subsequently becomes incrementally higher as it goes further towards
the eastern parts of the country ($513/kg in Surabaya, East Java). A drug
policy expert in Jakarta asserts that the entry point of cannabis from Sumatra
to Java is Sukabumi, a city in West Java province, which is about 80 km south
of Jakarta.
Unlike the situation in a regulated market, local dealers and runners sell
ganja per package (paket in Indonesian), without using units of measurement
such as grams or ounces. A package of cannabis costs approximately Rp
100,000 ($7.26), which is sucient for 5-6 joints, according to a regular
consumer living in a city in West Java. Compared to other illicit psychoactive
substances, cannabis is considered highly aordable, especially considering
the price of an ecstasy tablet ($29), heroin ($36 per 250 mg), crystal meth ($29
per 250 mg), and acid ($14.50 per strip). As well as nancial reasons, ganja
Once it reaches Jakarta,
the country’s capital, the
wholesale price could be
more than twofold ($220)
or ten times the price paid
to the grower

9 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
consumption is also considered more prevalent and acceptable due to its
element of locality, in contrast to the use of synthetic drugs perceived as an
‘imported’ culture.
In one of its reports, the BNN also discusses the signicance of drug
production (as well as widespread distribution and consumption) in
Indonesian prisons. Though the type of drugs being produced and
distributed is not mentioned, the report acknowledges the crucial
involvement of not only prisoners – who consume and sell drugs – but also
visitors and prison ocers. A prison is the most convenient and safe place
for drug consumption, according to many inmates interviewed by the BNN,
especially considering the availability, higher quality and lower prices of
narcotics inside prisons.37 In 2014, a case of cannabis sales was revealed
in Lapas Klas II Narkotika Ghrasia, a detention and rehabilitation centre in
Yogyakarta, where the vast majority of inmates are cannabis users. There
were allegations that tennis balls were used to store cannabis and thrown
over the prison gates for sales outside the detention centre.38
Consumption patterns
Indonesia’s anti-narcotics law and policies mean most data on cannabis use
are gathered and presented by the BNN in a context of prohibition, referring
to users as ‘abusers’ (penyalahguna in Indonesian). The use of such negative
language in the public discourse on drug use poses many challenges in
understanding the actual patterns of cannabis consumption among the
population.
Most cannabis users consume it by smoking its buds and occasionally mixing
them with tobacco, while traditional uses of cannabis seeds for cooking and
food processing, as well as cannabis in coee and tea, are commonly found
in Aceh. In 2006, the BNN documented various cannabis products seized
during eradication programmes in Aceh, ranging from cannabis oil, a typical
South East Asian toee-like confection, to dierent local dishes such as curry,
fried noodles, meatballs soup, and peanut sauce – mainly prepared with
cannabis seeds and/or oil.39
In most of their reports, the BNN places the frequency of drug use – hence
also cannabis use – into three categories: 1) occasional/trial use: less than
ve times in the past year; 2) regular use: 5-49 times in the past year; 3)
non-injecting addiction: more than 49 times in the past year, implying that
a person who smokes a cannabis joint one or two times a week will be
considered a cannabis addict. It is important to note that cannabis has been
the most common choice of substance for each category in virtually all
provinces in the country.40 A BNN ocial notes that besides its aordability,
the prevalent use of cannabis – particularly in the rst category – can be
linked with the common perception that cannabis is relatively less dangerous
than other drugs because of it being a plant-based substance.
In 2006, the BNN
documented various
cannabis products seized
during eradication
programmes in Aceh,
ranging from cannabis
oil, a typical South
East Asian toee-like
confection, to dierent
local dishes such as curry,
fried noodles, meatballs
soup, and peanut sauce
– mainly prepared with
cannabis seeds and/or oil

10 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
With ever tighter law enforcement eorts against drug possession and
tracking, however, it is increasingly dicult to nd cannabis on the market,
least of all high-quality cannabis. Similar to the eects of prohibition in other
countries, synthetic drugs (mainly synthetic cannabinoids) – whose exact
compositions are still under scientic scrutiny – are increasingly available
and popular as a cannabis substitute. One of the most popular is referred
to as ‘Gorilla tobacco’. This type of legal high reached its peak of popularity
between January and May 2015.
Historical overview
In 1927, the Dutch colonial government in the Dutch East Indies, driven
by international developments in cannabis control, passed a decree that
prohibited the cultivation, import and export, production and use of narcotic
drugs, except for medical and scientic purposes with prior government
authorisation. Although its primary focus was opium and its derivatives,
the decree prohibited the cultivation of Indian hemp (cannabis), as well as
outlining a number of restrictions on the use, possession and distribution
of cannabis, some of which were subject to nes and/or short-term jail
sentences (See Table 1).
A consumer’s perspective
Adi (aged 28) rst tried smoking cannabis joints with his close friends in junior high school.
In search of something other than alcohol, Adi and his group of friends decided to try cimeng
(urban slang for cannabis). According to Adi, who currently smokes cannabis less than once a
week, cannabis is an attractive substance as it yields a certain level of sensory enhancement.
This explains why he prefers to combine his consumption with activities such as reading,
listening to music, or enjoying scenic, natural views. For Adi, his social circle is another
important factor in his cannabis use, as the level of enjoyment of recreational cannabis is
largely dependent on the group of which he is part.
Adi points out that many cannabis users, particularly those in his circle, have experienced a
few phases in becoming increasingly aware of the social and political aspects of cannabis use
as well as drug use in general. “Firstly, we would focus merely on the euphoria and thrill of
using something illegal. But the more we use it, the more we try to know about the medicinal
and industrial value of cannabis.” Despite this, Adi thinks that drug laws in Indonesia are in
chaos, and that the country is far from tolerating the recreational use of cannabis. As he puts
it, “what’s behind Indonesian [cannabis] laws is still incomprehensible to me, whether or not
there is some kind of a clandestine deal between the government and external stakeholders.”
Overview of the Indonesian anti-narcotic laws and their
relationship with cannabis

11 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
Table 1: A timeline of cannabis legislation
Currency-related information: $1 = Rp 13,650 US$1 = 2.01 NLG (Dutch guilders)
Time
period Legislation Status of cannabis (Cannabis-related) penalties
1927 -
1976
Verdovende
Middellen
Ordonnantie
(Decree on
Narcotic
Drugs)
Import, export,
possession,
preparation and use
are highly restricted
Cultivation and
possession in
relation to cannabis
are prohibited
(Scheduling is non-
existent)
Oences with regard to regulations for import and export are
punishable by a wide range of nes
Cultivation and a range of naval transport-related oences
(specically for captains): A maximum ne of 1,000 guilders or a
prison sentence of a maximum of six months
Import, export (personal or in custody) possession, preparation, use,
processing: a maximum of 3,000 guilders or a three-month prison
sentence
1976 -
1997
Law No. 9
Year 1976
on Narcotics
Restricted use
for medical and
research purposes
only
(Scheduling is non-
existent)
Personal use: maximum two-year prison sentence
Cultivation and/or production, possession and small-scale
distribution: maximum of a six-year prison sentence and ne of Rp
10 million
Dealing and tracking: 20-year prison or life sentence and a
maximum ne of Rp 30 million
1997 -
2009
Law No. 22
Year 1997
on Narcotics
Schedule I: highly
restricted use for
research purposes
only
In comparison,
substances under
Schedule II and III
may be restrictively
distributed for
research and
medical purposes
Personal use: maximum four-year prison sentence
Small and large scale possession and cultivation: 10 to 15-year
prison sentence and a ne between Rp 25 million – 5 billion
Production and distribution: 4 to 20-year prison or life sentence, or
death penalty and a ne between Rp 200 million – 5 billion
Tracking: 2 to 20-year prison or life sentence, or death penalty
and a ne between Rp 100 million – 5 billion
Import, export and sales: 4 to 20-year prison or life sentence, or
death penalty and a ne ranging from Rp 1 – 7 billion
2009 -
present
Law No. 35
Year 2009
on Narcotics
Schedule I: highly
restricted use for
research purposes
only
In comparison,
substances under
Schedule II and III
may be restrictively
distributed for
research and
medical purposes
Personal use: maximum 4-year prison sentence and/or mandatory
rehabilitation (Article 127)
Possession, cultivation, and supply provision: 4-12-year prison
sentence and a ne between Rp 800 million – 8 billion
*Cultivation of more than 1 kg or 5 plants: 5-20-year prison or life
sentence with a higher amount of nes
(Article 111)
Production, imports, exports, and distribution: 5-15-year prison
sentence and a ne between Rp 1 – 10 billion
*In the case of more than 1 kg or 5 plants: death penalty, life
imprisonment or 5-20-year prison sentence with a ne higher
than Rp 10 billion (Article 113)
Sales and purchases for dealing purposes: 5-20-year prison or life
sentence and a ne between Rp 1-10 billion
*In the case of more than 1 kg or 5 plants: death penalty, life
imprisonment or 6-20-year prison sentence with a ne higher
than Rp 10 billion (Article 114)
Transporting: 4-12-year prison or life sentence and a ne between
Rp 800 million – 8 billion
*In the case of more than 1 kg or 5 plants: life imprisonment or
5-20-year prison sentence with a ne higher than Rp 8 billion
(Article 115)
Provision of drugs to others: 5-15-year prison sentence and a ne
of Rp 1 – 10 billion
*Provision which lead to permanent injuries/deaths: death penalty,
life imprisonment or 5-20-year of prison and ne higher than Rp
10 billion (Article 116)

12 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
After independence, and despite the unproblematic nature of cannabis in
the country, the new Indonesian government kept the colonial regulations.
Fifteen years following the 1961 UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs,
the Indonesian government passed a set of laws with regard to the use of
psychoactive substances, including cannabis. The anti-narcotics law passed in
1976, however, does not entail any categorisation of substances, describing
the cannabis plant as a type of narcotic which can be restrictively used for
medical and research purposes only.
The Indonesian government rst declared a war on drugs in 2002 under
the leadership of President Megawati. An independent National Narcotics
Board (BNN) was established in March 2002, leading to counter-narcotics
programmes conducted by various government institutions down to village
level. A month later, an enormous illicit drug laboratory was seized in the
Banten province, drawing international attention to Indonesia and its growing
signicance in the regional drug trade.
The BNN responded by designing a ‘war plan’ that aimed for ‘a drug-free
Indonesia in 2015’, and pushed for an increase in spending for its counter-
narcotics programmes, emphasising Indonesia’s geopolitical vulnerability to
drug tracking and the current lack of manpower and resources for anti-drug
operations amid the worrying rise of drug abuse in the country. In order to
achieve its drug-free target, the BNN also recommended stronger international
cooperation in law enforcement against transnational drug tracking,
alongside the development of rehabilitation treatments for drug users.
In 2003, the BNN set up provincial branches (BNP – Badan Narkotika
Provinsi or Provincial Narcotics Board), expanding the institution’s anti-
drug operations, including the ‘Preventing and Combating Illicit Drug
Tracking and Abuse’ programme (P4GN; Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan
Penyalahgunaan dan Peredaran Gelap Narkoba).41 Nevertheless, many
observers widely believe that “the fundamental problem of Indonesia’s
illicit drug tracking is corruption in the law enforcement sector which
allows large-scale criminal enterprises to operate hand-in-hand with corrupt
ocers. Adrianus Meliala, a prominent [Indonesian] criminologist, openly
criticises “the police, who are supposed to ght drug crime, are drug dealers
and consumers”.42
The current legal framework
Under the 2009 anti-narcotics law, all elements of cannabis were classied
as Schedule I drugs, along with other types of psychoactive substances
such as heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine. Due to this categorisation
deriving from the 1961 UN Single Convention, cannabis is rarely discussed as
a separate substance. This has much to do with the zero tolerance discourse
and common generalisation of drugs in the country, particularly in terms
of cannabis being considered as harmful and addictive as other Schedule I
substances.

13 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
According to several Indonesian drug policy analysts, the law passed in
2009 had been deliberately designed by the government to prioritise
rehabilitation over prosecution of drug users and/or addicts, unlike previous
laws that appeared to consider drug users merely as criminals.43 This view
was reinforced by Anang Iskandar, the former head of the BNN, who stated
that based on current laws, drug use was no longer considered a serious
criminal oence and thus its penalties would not exceed four years of
imprisonment.44 This is indeed explicitly stated in the current anti-narcotics
law, with a note concerning drug users’ obligations to report themselves and
enter both medical and social rehabilitation programmes (Article 54 of Law
35/2009), followed by an article which states the obligation of parents of drug
users to initiate this process.
Nonetheless, the ambiguous nature of several paragraphs in the anti-narcotic
law provides loopholes for dierent interpretations of drug-related arrests
depending on the relevant law enforcement ocial(s), current governmental
priorities, as well as the social, economic, and political status of the suspect.
As shown in the table above, the current law provides dierent categories
of oences and their respective penalties. The law furthermore includes a
denition of drug users – referred to as ‘abusers’ – and separates them from
dealers, yet it does not acknowledge the dierent levels of drug dealing and
hence the various actors involved. As an illustration, if a person buys a small
amount of cannabis to be shared with friends, there is a likelihood that a
police or a BNN ocer would consider an arrest as a drug dealer or runner,
as the purchased drug is to be distributed to potential users.45
Considering the limited access to legal support for arrested drug users, the
aforementioned issues have many implications for conviction and prison
sentencing.46 A member of the Indonesian Drug Users’ Network (PKNI)
suggests that in 2014, only 17 out of thousands of arrested drug users were
transferred into rehabilitation centres (See Table 1: Article 127 of the Law
35/2009), while the rest had to mainly serve their prison sentences, not to
mention a number of drug users who were prosecuted as drug dealers/
runners and faced heavier sentences accordingly (See Table 1: Article 111
of the Law 35/2009). In some cases, this is also attributed to the absence of
medical records proving that a suspect is addicted to cannabis and hence in
need of rehabilitation treatments.
A PKNI youth programme ocer provides an example of cannabis use in
Yogyakarta, Central Java, where most users arrested by police ocers were
transferred to a prison called Lapas Klas II Narkotika Ghrasia, in which punitive
rehabilitation programmes take place. Participants are obliged to perform
hard labour in order to receive food and water, while those who wish to
leave the programme sooner are required to pass the centre’s examinations
– whose indicators range from the participants’ work ethics and diligence, to
their involvement in the centre’s religious programmes. In Yogyakarta, it has
hardly ever been the case that arrested users are sent to the rehabilitation
centres of the Ministry of Social Aairs (MoSA) and the Ministry of Health
(MoH), which is contrary to the law. Another common concern shared by
If a person buys a small
amount of cannabis to
be shared with friends,
there is a likelihood
that a police or a BNN
ocer would consider an
arrest as a drug dealer or
runner, as the purchased
drug is to be distributed to
potential users

14 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
local drug policy analysts relates to prison overcrowding, which has been
attributed to the majority being arrested and sentenced for drug-related
oences, mainly for possession. In September 2015, capacity in local prisons
across the country averagely reached 145 per cent, with rates above 260 per
cent for the province of Jakarta Special Capital Region, Central Kalimantan,
and Riau.47
Political and institutional issues
When it comes to enforcing anti-narcotics law, there are several institutions
that play a number of roles with regard to research, arrests and prosecution,
prevention and eradication, as well as rehabilitation. Although the BNN
appears to be the most prominent institution, the law also outlines a list of
responsibilities of the National Police Department (Polri), as well as the MoH
and MoSA in respect of medical and social rehabilitation programmes for
drug users.
The BNN is a non-ministerial institution established in 2002 that functions
as the main agency coordinating implementation of the anti-narcotics law.
Accountable to the head of the Indonesian police department who directly
reports to the president, the BNN performs a wide variety of tasks in relation
to drug prevention, eradication, investigation, international cooperation, as
well as research. Due to its increasingly important political position in the
country, most drug-related data, policies, and programmes are administered
by the BNN, occasionally posing challenges when it comes to consulting
alternative data sources.
Debate on cannabis legalisation sparks controversy
In 2007, the BNN and the Indonesian National Institute for Drug Abuse (INIDA) issued a
proposal to review the legal status of cannabis in Indonesia. Tomi Hardjatno, a drug expert
working as a consultant for the BNN, spoke up against the demonisation of ganja despite its
common use for culinary purposes in Aceh. Using the Dutch coeeshop system as an example,
Hardjatno argued that cannabis was not as dangerous as most people thought it was,
emphasising the plant’s potential industrial benets. He noted the hallucinogenic eects of
cannabis leaves, but asserted that “[t]hey do not cause big negative eects”.48 In video footage
from the Associated Press, Hardjatno highlighted the importance of scientic review in nding
a way to make use of the benets of cannabis as opposed to the negative connotations
associated with the plant.49
Debate on cannabis legalisation sparked controversy in the country. Angry religious protesters
immediately took to the streets to complain about the government’s neglect – supposedly by
pursuing ways to legalise a drug – of Indonesian citizens who were ready to comply with the
(anti-narcotics) law.50 Following enquiries, Indonesian vice president Jusuf Kalla argued against
the idea of cannabis legalisation, but said that “[i]t’s alright to use it as a food seasoning”. It
appears that the proposal for review was dismissed immediately, most likely due to apparent
anti-drug sentiments among vocal religious groups.51

15 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
As part of various law enforcement eorts, the BNN builds cooperation
with police ocers especially with regard to arrests and seizures. As stated
before, ocials from both institutions often interpret the law in dierent
ways, bringing uncertainty for cannabis users who are unfortunate enough
to get caught, not to mention those who are falsely accused of drug
dealing. Despite the Supreme Court’s fair denition of a cannabis user (one
possessing up to 5 grams of cannabis – to be explained further below),
there is often a lack of consensus in terms of law enforcement eorts in the
eld, exacerbated by the widespread existence of corrupt law enforcement
ocers, which accommodates illicit drug tracking activities.52
In addition to institutional competition between the BNN and the National
Police Department (Polri), occasional clashes also occur between the BNN
and the MoH and MoSA, primarily around their responsibilities and nancial
resources, particularly in relation to rehabilitation programmes.
A path towards decriminalisation?
In 2009 the Supreme Court issued a Circular (Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung
or SEMA) describing the conditions and procedures for sending drug users to
rehabilitation centres. Considered part of the 2009 narcotics law, the Circular
technically dierentiates drug users from dealers or trackers based on the
quantity of drugs with which they are caught. In 2010, the Supreme Court
revised the Circular, emphasising both medical and social rehabilitation for
drug users as well as a modied list of substances, along with the respective
quantities applicable for personal consumption. In practice, the Circular
asserts that any person caught with the possession of less or not more
than 5 grams of cannabis should be considered a user who has the right to
rehabilitation programmes unless evidence suggests that he/she has been
involved in drug dealing or tracking activities.
The issuing of the Circular may indicate a growing tendency towards (the)
decriminalisation (of small-scale possession of drugs), especially considering
the main reason for the initiative: to alleviate prison overcrowding attributed
to the imprisonment of drug users. In 2014, this led to the issue of a Joint
Regulation approved and signed by the head of the Supreme Court, the
A cannabis user’s testimony
“A friend of mine got arrested for less than a gram of cannabis. The police came inside, looked
at the rug in his house, and started gathering remnants [of cannabis use]. And for that, it cost
him 60 million rupiahs [$4400] to avoid punishment. The thing is, that’s often the case for not
only 10-20 people, perhaps hundreds of people...”
Adi (28), Jakarta

16 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
Minister of Justice, the Minister of Health, the Minister of Social Aairs, the
Attorney General, the head of the National Police, and the head of the BNN.
Similar to the Circular, the Joint Regulation includes the conditions and
procedures for the provision of rehabilitation treatments for drug users,
including those who are suspected and convicted of drug dealing.
However, the implementation of both the Circular and the Joint Regulation
still falls under the framework of punishment.53 The two provisions
would be more correctly seen as a form of de-penalisation as opposed
to decriminalisation.54 It is also crucial to note the narrow scope of the
Circular, which does not bind law enforcement agencies such as the BNN
and the National Police to comply with its provisions. More importantly,
the decision of the judge to issue permission to attend rehabilitation
programmes – for which the government has not pledged complete funding
– largely depends on the legal and medical examination conducted by the
Integrated Assessment Team (Tim Asesmen Terpadu), whose responsibilities
and recommendations are often ignored by investigators within the police
department.55
The government’s seemingly growing attention for rehabilitation
programmes appears to have departed from the assumption that all drug
users are in urgent need for treatment due to their problematic use. In terms
of cannabis, only 5 to 10 per cent develop some level of problematic use,
while the great majority of users do not require treatment.56 The practice of
mandatory rehabilitation also reduces the opportunity (and resources) to
provide adequate treatment for groups who face real problematic use with
substances such as heroin and methamphetamine.
Jokowi’s war on drugs
Many criticisms arose after President Joko Widodo (Jokowi) decided to
execute 14 drug trackers in April 2015. He defended his policy by pointing
at the lethal nature of drugs and the signicant contribution of drug
trackers to the distribution of drugs among the Indonesian population,

17 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
although many activists and academics have publicly questioned the validity
of the claim as well as the eectiveness of capital punishment in terms of
deterring crimes and drug-related deaths.57 Jokowi’s execution policy, despite
wide internal support,58 has been heavily criticised from various angles,
ranging from legal to policy-making and human rights perspectives.
Despite growing controversy at both national and international level, the
Jokowi government remained rm and escalated its war on drugs in the
country instead. Consequently, the BNN, together with the MoH and MoSA,
has been authorised to gather as many as 100,000 drug users who are to
be transferred into rehabilitation centres. This quantitative target will be
doubled every year, meaning that 200,000 drug users will be ‘rehabilitated’ in
2016.59 As many corrupt ocials attempt to reach their quantitative targets
for higher nancial reward, PKNI explains, more practices such as forced
urine tests, fraudulent sales of controlled medicines and breaches of patient
condentiality have become widespread. Local drug policy analysts have
expressed their concerns regarding the eectiveness (and legality) of the
measures, not to mention the (forced) rehabilitation programmes planned
for these targeted drug users.
As illustrated above, it was not only after Jokowi declared a war on drugs
that Indonesia became known for its strict anti-drug stance, including on
cannabis. In 2001, Zainal Abidin, a wood polisher and an elementary school
graduate, was charged with possession of 58.7 kilograms of cannabis and
sentenced to 18-years’ imprisonment. Following the appeal process, however,
he was convicted with drug tracking and sent to death row in 2001. He
was executed as late as April 2015. Similar to many other cases in Indonesia,
Abidin had very limited access to legal counsel.60
Though seemingly on the rise, advertisements against (use and distribution
of) drugs have always been widespread in Indonesia, showing the common
generalisation of psychoactive substances and their dierent origins and
characteristics. While creating a common discourse on illicit drugs through
propaganda with a moral tone, the government continues to neglect the
complexity of the illegal drug market and the actors involved. When it comes
to cannabis, this whole dynamic not only signicantly limits discussions on
the cultural, traditional, and medicinal aspects of the substance, but it also
promotes the exclusion of individuals associated with cannabis use and
production.
Seizures, eradication, and alternative development
The following chart provides an overview of cannabis seizures from 2003
to 2013, according to the BNN and the United Nations Oce on Drugs and
Crime, who compiled the data from government sources, annual report
questionnaires, and the UNODC SMART programmes. Most eradication
programmes were implemented under the P4GN umbrella of the BNN,
especially following the 2005 instruction of General Sutanto – the police and
As many corrupt ocials
attempt to reach their
quantitative targets for
higher nancial reward,
PKNI explains, more
practices such as forced
urine tests, fraudulent
sales of controlled
medicines and breaches
of patient condentiality
have become widespread

18 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
BNN chief at that time – to order all regional police chiefs to eradicate illicit
drugs in dierent parts of Indonesia.61
Amount of cannabis plants seized between 2003–2013
As illustrated above, the scale of seizure of cannabis plants peaked in 2006–
2007. In 2006, it was reported that 1,109,307 cannabis plants were seized
(and possibly eradicated), while the number escalated to 1,869,595 in 2007.
This may have been attributed to a set of eradication programmes conducted
by the BNN following the 49th Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) meeting
as well as UNODC endorsement for eliminating the illegal cannabis trade in
Indonesia. Three major operations (Nila Rencong Operations) were carried
out, in collaboration with the provincial BNN oce in Aceh and the Acehnese
Provincial Police, in various locations and sub-districts within Aceh province.62
These eradication operations were followed by a series of alternative
development projects assisted by UNODC and the Mae Fah Luang
Foundation, which comprised health-related development programmes and
sustainable rural development projects, such as reconstruction of irrigation
systems that aimed to create agricultural livelihoods as alternatives to
cannabis cultivation.63 The programme took place between 2006–2010, which
may explain another peak in 2011, the same year in which the U.S. Drug
Enforcement Agency (DEA) opened its oce in Jakarta and began providing
counter-narcotics assistance, including for cannabis eradication eorts in
North Sumatra.64
Following recent enquiries, The Jakarta Post reports that by the end of
2015, the BNN had eradicated 64 hectares of cannabis plantations across
Indonesia, claiming that 60 hectares of which had been converted into areas
where farmers could cultivate alternative crops such as cacao, patchouli,
soybeans, and turmeric, mainly in Aceh province, accompanied by a training
programme on cacao cultivation provided by the BNN for 150 Acehnese
farmers. In terms of the BNN’s action plan for 2016, the BNN’s spokesperson
Slamet Pribadi emphasizes the BNN’s intention to avoid the prosecution
of cannabis farmers while increasing their focus on “investors” allegedly
controlling most cannabis plantations in Aceh.65 Despite its seeming success,
however, current crop substitution programmes are often contested by

19 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
local researchers, especially due to the signicantly lower market value of
alternative crops in comparison with cannabis.
Many local drug policy activists and analysts have expressed concerns about
the high level of media exposure for cannabis eradication and seizure,
especially considering the questionable validity of the reported activities. It
is quite likely that several crop eradication and seizures carried out by law
enforcement agencies have been previously staged in order to increase the
number of arrests or merely to create a case for media coverage, according
to a PKNI member who occasionally discusses the issue with local cannabis
farmers in Aceh.
For more than 10 years there have been a number of Indonesian
organisations and NGOs promoting and working on harm-reduction
programmes as well as providing legal advocacy for drug users, including in
the specic case of cannabis. The rst license for research on cannabis was
also recently issued by the government, marking a starting point for advocacy
organisations to cooperate with ministerial institutions on investigating
the cultural contexts and medicinal applications of cannabis. Working on
inuencing the law at a national level, however, has been quite a tall order.
While there have been many criticisms of current national counter-narcotics
strategies, local activists and researchers acknowledge and deplore the
Looking ahead: potential for reforms?
Circle of Cannabis Archipelago
In 2007, a social media campaign for the legalisation of cannabis in Indonesia was initiated
under the banner Dukung Legalisasi Ganja (DLG, meaning Support Cannabis Legalisation).
In May 2010, DLG supporters held their rst rally in the Indonesian capital Jakarta on the
occasion of the annual Global Marijuana March, attempting to inform the public about the
rationale behind cannabis legalisation in the country. The DLG campaign managed to gather
as many as 42,000 followers by 2011, and eventually transformed into a research, education,
and advocacy organisation called Lingkar Ganja Nusantara (LGN or Circle of Cannabis
Archipelago).
Since 2011, LGN has embraced and discussed the traditional and cultural contexts of cannabis
in dierent parts of Indonesia, while simultaneously informing the public about the legal
aspects of cannabis. Through these eorts, they published a book, Hikayat Pohon Ganja:
12,000 tahun menyuburkan peradaban manusia (The Tale of Cannabis Tree: 12,000 years enriching
human civilization).
In early 2015, LGN established its research body, Yayasan Sativa Nusantara (YSN; Sativa
Nusantara Foundation), and managed to obtain the rst license from the government to
legally conduct scientic research on the cannabis plant.

20 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
absence of any concrete policy alternatives, which is mostly due to the
immense complexity of drug-related issues in the country. According to PKNI,
Indonesian lawmakers have admitted the importance of revising current drug
policies, yet the initiative has not been included in the 2015 agenda of legal
reforms.
In terms of cannabis policy development, Indonesia appears to be lagging
behind neighbouring countries. In the Philippines, for instance, a bill to
legalise the use of medical cannabis was proposed in 2014 by Rep. Rodolfo
Albano III, namely the House Bill 4477 or the Compassionate Use of Medical
Cannabis Act.66 On the other hand, the Indonesian government had never
granted a license for any forms of research on cannabis up until February
2015, in spite of cannabis being one of the most frequently used illicit
substances in the country. However, cannabis policy organisations such as
LGN, who will be cooperating with the MoH in the recently approved research
programme on cannabis, are hopeful that they will witness a shift in public
opinion on the topic of cannabis, principally in respect of the substance’s
medicinal benets.
Historically, the widespread consumption of cannabis for traditional,
recreational and medicinal purposes in the Indonesian archipelago seems to
have only been discovered in North Sumatra, mainly in the Aceh region, most
likely because of its geographical proximity to the Indian mainland – a region
where cannabis use was a more common cultural phenomenon. There is
indeed no concrete evidence as to how the use of cannabis spread from
North Sumatra to the rest of Indonesia, and eventually became statistically
more common than the consumption of other psychoactive substances. One
possible – yet incomplete – explanation is that following the opium-related
restrictions imposed by the colonial government, cannabis became a regular
substitute for opium.
While the rst prohibitions of cannabis were attributed to international
developments on cannabis control as opposed to consumption-related
problems, the government of post-independence Indonesia decided to
retain a prohibitionist approach, incrementally creating restrictions in the
cultivation, distribution and use of cannabis.
The current, outdated categorisation of cannabis as a Schedule I substance
appears to have detrimental impacts not only on cannabis-related
oenders such as users and farmers, but also on those victimised due to
the illicit distribution of highly addictive drugs such as heroin and crystal
methamphetamine. By spending scarce public resources on arrests,
prosecutions, imprisonment, and unnecessary mandatory rehabilitation
programmes for cannabis users, not to mention for non-problematic users
of other substances, policy-makers fail to address the practical needs of
Conclusion

21 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
drug users, who will remain marginalised unless the government shifts
its attention from supply-reduction eorts to policies based on scientic
evidence and harm-reduction principles. The recent escalation of the war
on drugs in the country has helped foster the practice of corruption and
extortion among law enforcement ocers, who have beneted either
directly or indirectly from the current prohibitionist policies. These practices
have particularly victimised drug users and supply-side oenders who are
economically vulnerable.
First and foremost, it is important for policy-makers to acknowledge the
economic aspect of the production and distribution of cannabis, which is
generated by constant demand and perpetuated by the apparent overlap
and relations between legal and illegal enterprises, motivated by either prot
or subsistence. It is crucial for public institutions to take these dynamics
into account prior to conducting any research activities for policy-making or
evaluation purposes, and thus refrain from using any political prejudices or
ideologies to nd an evidence-based set of alternative policies.
Secondly, cannabis is the most frequent choice of substance among drug
users. Decriminalising its personal use, possession for personal use, and
small-scale cultivation would not only be economically benecial, but would
also pave the way to minimising problems such as prison overcrowding,
corruption and extortion practices, and may halt the distribution of synthetic
cannabinoids, which are perceived to be safer due to their legal status. In
this case, de-penalising drug use through the eective implementation of the
Supreme Court Circular and other technical regulations would be a crucial
rst step. Additionally, it would be wise for the government to consider
tolerating the traditional use of cannabis in Aceh and thus putting an end to
eradication programmes, especially considering the region’s traditional and
historical relationship with cannabis use.
Although legal reforms and the rescheduling of cannabis appear unlikely in
the near future, policy-makers should respect institutional responsibilities
of parties such as the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Social Aairs,
notably in relation with research programmes on cannabis and its potential
medical applications, which are technically permissible under the current
narcotics law. Lastly, there is an urgent need for the government to work on
improving cooperation and coordination on the issue of cannabis between
public institutions – ranging from lawmakers, various ministerial institutions,
the Supreme Court, the BNN, the National Police, to the Indonesian military
– and more importantly between public enterprises and civil society and
community-based organisations.
Recommendations

22 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
Endnotes
1. Dania Putri is an International Public Management
student in The Hague University who conducts an internship
at the Transnational Institute (TNI). Tom Blickman is a senior
policy researcher at TNI.
2. BNN (March 2015). Laporan akhir: Survei nasional
perkembangan penyalahguna narkoba tahun anggaran 2014.
Retrieved from http://bnn.go.id/portal/index.php/konten/
detail/humas/pressrelease/12691/laporan-akhir-survei-
nasional-perkembangan-penyalahguna-narkoba-tahun-
anggaran-2014
3. Indonesia was under Dutch colonial rule (known as
the Dutch East Indies) until 1949 when the country gained
independence after a three-year armed struggle.
4. Cribb, R. and Kahin, A. (2004). Historical Dictionary of
Indonesia. Scarecrow Press, Inc. pp. 68.
5. Cribb, R. and Kahin, A. (2004). Betel is a term used to
describe the seed of the palm Arecha catechu, which is said
to have been chewed around the 7th century, mixed with
substances such as lime, pepper leaf, opium or tobacco.
6. Boorsma, W. G. (1892). Eenige bijzonderheden omtrent
cannabis sativa, var. indica. Teysmannia 1892, III, pp. 792-799;
Boorsma, W. G. (1918). Over het voorkomen en het gebruik
van Indische hennep in Ned.-Indië. Teysmannia, VI, 1918. pp.
324-334; Veth, P. J. (1869). Schets van het eiland Sumatra.
Overdruk uit het Aardrijkskundig en Statistisch Woordenboek van
Nederlandsch Indië. Amsterdam: P. N. van Kampen, pp. 41.
7. Boorsma, W. G. (1917). Pharmacologisch laboratorium.
Jaarboek van het departement van landbouw, nijverheid en
handel 1915, Batavia: Landsdrukkerij, pp. 21-29
8. Heyne, K. (1916). De nuttige planten van Nederlandsch-
Indië: Tevens synthetische catalogus der verzamelingen van
het museum voor economische botanie te Buitenzorg, Batavia:
Ruygrok & Co.
9. Boorsma, W. G. (1917).
10. Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch-Indië, Aevering 1, 1
Januari 1896. See also: Boorsma (1918), who mentions the use
of gendji for recreational purposes, sometimes mixed with
tobacco, in Semarang, Banjoemas and Surakarta (Central Java)
as well as in Malang, Blitar and Toeloengagoeng (East Java).
11. Princen Geerligs, H.C. (ed.) (1919). Dr. K.W. van Gorkom’s
Oost-Indische cultures (Volume 3), Amsterdam: J.H. de
Bussy, pp. 20-21, available at https://archive.org/stream/
drkwvangorkomsoo03gorkuoft. Since, at the time, Dutch
observers were not well informed about the use of cannabis
and tobacco among the native populations, this might have
been overlooked attributing it to the native tobacco culture.
12. Rumphius, G. E. (1741). Herbarium Amboinense,
vol. V. t. 77. Retrieved from http://www.botanicus.org/
item/31753000819455
13. Java-bode. (March 28, 1872). Retrieved from http://www.
delpher.nl/nl/kranten/view?query=cannabis&facets%5Bspat
ial%5D%5B%5D=Nederlands-Indi%C3%AB+%7C+Indonesi%
C3%AB&page=1&sorteld=date&coll=ddd&identier=ddd%
3A010483864%3Ampeg21%3Aa0022&resultsidentier=ddd%3
A010483864%3Ampeg21%3Aa0022
14. Cannabis cigarettes were manufactured by Grimault in
Paris.
15. Bataviaasch Handelsblad. (October 10, 1876). Retrieved
from http://www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/view?query=cannabis&
facets%5Bspatial%5D%5B%5D=Nederlands-Indi%C3%AB+%7C
+Indonesi%C3%AB&page=5&sorteld=date&coll=ddd&identi
er=ddd%3A110534929%3Ampeg21%3Aa0009&resultsidentier
=ddd%3A110534929%3Ampeg21%3Aa0009
16. Boorsma, W. G. (1917); Boorsma, W. G. (1918).
Also based on local interviews conducted by Lingkar Ganja
Nusantara. For the current use of ganja in Aceh, see also: Coee
and ganja provide a healthy income in Aceh, The Sydney Morning
Herald, January 11, 2015, available at http://www.smh.com.
au/world/coee-and-ganja-provide-a-healthy-income-in-aceh-
20150111-12ltev.html
17. Lingkar Ganja Nusantara (2015). Terms of Reference
Brainstorming Etnobotani Hikayat Ganja Nusantara. The
holy books Mujarabat and Tajul Muluk were also discussed
during a private interview with Dhira Narayana, the national
coordinator of Lingkar Ganja Nusantara (LGN), as the books
refer to medicinal use of cannabis to treat ‘sweet blood’,
perceived to be diabetes.
18. Bewley-Taylor, D., Blickman, T., Jelsma, M. (2014). The Rise
and Decline of Cannabis Prohibition: The History of Cannabis in
the UN Drug Control System and Options for Reform. Amsterdam:
Transnational Institute & Global Drug Policy Observatory, p.
13.
19. Cultures en Nijverheid. Indische hennep, De Sumatra Post,
10 September 1912, available at http://resolver.kb.nl/reso
lve?urn=ddd:010324007:mpeg21:a0046; Jaarboek van het
Departement van Landbouw, Nijverheid en Handel 1915 (pp.
21-29). Batavia Landsdrukkerij.
20. Boorsma, W. G. (1917). For the Indian communities
in Indonesia, see: Sandhu, K.S. & Mani, A. (1993). Indian
Communities in Southeast Asia, Singapore: Institute of Southeast
Asian Studies.
21. Opium, De Sumatra Post, 19 September 1916, available
at http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010366754:mpe
g21:a0051. Both opium and coca leaf were cultivated for
commercial purposes under government control.
22. Bewley-Taylor, D., Blickman, T., Jelsma, M. (2014), p. 25
23. Boorsma, W. G. (1917).
24. Een gandja-verordening in Atjeh, De Sumatra Post, 26
November 1924, available at http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=
ddd:011023481:mpeg21:a0100
25. See for instance: Gandja of Indische Hennep: Verboden
aanplant, De Sumatra Post, 23 November 1935, available at
http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010971152:mpeg21
:a0043; Voor-Indiër neergeslagen. In Kampong Soekaradja, De
Sumatra Post, 16 May 1935, available at http://resolver.kb.nl/res
olve?urn=ddd:010971171:mpeg21:a0016
26. Lingkar Ganja Nusantara (April 2014). Sekarang aku, besok
kamu! Advocate ourself! Retrieved from https://www.scribd.
com/doc/230918755/eBook-Sabk-Edisi-1-Feb-2014
27. BNN (2014). Lingkar Ganja Nusantara (April 2014).
28. Global SMART Programme (2013), Indonesia Situation
Assessment on Ampthetamine-type Stimulants, United Nations
Oce on Drugs and Crime. Retrieved from https://www.
unodc.org/documents/indonesia//publication/2013/Indonesia_
ATS_2013_low.pdf
29. Human Rights Watch. (1990). ‘Indonesia: Human Rights
Abuses in Aceh’. News From Asia Watch – 7. Retrieved from
https://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/i/indonesa/indonesi90d.pdf
30. Kingsbury, D. & McCulloch, L. (2006). ‘Military Business in
Aceh’, in: Reid, A. (Ed). Verandah of Violence: The Background to
the Aceh Conict, Singapore: NUS Press, pp. 212–217.
31. Schulze, K. E. (2004). ‘The Free Aceh Movement (GAM):
Anatomy of a separatist organization’, Policy Studies, No. 2,
Washington, DC: East-West Center.
32. Kingsbury, D. & McCulloch, L. (2006).
33. See the chapter about Aceh in: Braithwaite, J.,
Braithwaite, V., Cookson, M. and Dunn, L. (2010). Anomie
and Violence: Non-truth and reconciliation in Indonesian
peacebuilding, Canberra: Australian National University Press.
Retrieved from http://press.anu.edu.au/apps/bookworm/view/
Anomie+and+Violence/5311/ch06.xhtml

23 | Cannabis in Indonesia: Patterns in consumption, production, and policies transnationalinstitute
34. A pseudonym
35. BNN (2015), p. 41. On this page, the report shows several
testimonies from drug dealers.
36. This is also due to the rarity of high quality cannabis in
the market, according to a local respondent who shared his
personal experiences with cultivating cannabis.
37. BNN (2015). pp. 42-43.
38. Based on an interview conducted with a PKNI member
39. National Narcotic Board Republic of Indonesia. (n. d.)
Alternative development programme for cannabis growers in
the Province of Aceh, Republic of Indonesia.
40. BNN (2015).
41. Honna, J. (2011). ‘Orchestrating transnational crime:
security sector politics as a Trojan horse for anti-reformists’, in
Aspinall, E. and van Klinken, G. (Eds). The state and illegality in
Indonesia. Leiden: KITLV Press. pp. 267-272.
42. Honna, J. (2011), p. 270.
43. Government of Indonesia. (1997). Law No. 22 Year 1997
on Narcotics.
44. Lingkar Ganja Nusantara. (April 2014). Sekarang aku,
besok kamu! Advocate ourself! Lingkar Ganja Nusantara.
Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/doc/230918755/
eBook-Sabk-Edisi-1-Feb-2014
45. Government of Indonesia. (2009). Law No. 35 Year 2009
on Narcotics. The example was used by the Indonesian Drug
Users’ Network (PKNI) to illustrate how the ambiguous nature
of the anti-narcotics law sometimes victimises drug users.
46. Both the Indonesian Drug Users’ Network (PKNI) and
Lingkar Ganja Nusantara (LGN) have been providing legal
advocacy for arrested drug users, who mostly struggle to
defend themselves in court.
47. Data Terakhir Jumlah Penghuni Kanwil. Sistem Database
Permasyarakatan. Retrieved from http://smslap.ditjenpas.go.id/
public/grl/current/monthly
48. Legal weed a possibility, The Jakarta Post, 2 June 2007,
available at http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2007/06/02/
legal-weed-possibility.html; BNN Kaji Legalkan Ganja,
Detiknews, 31 May 2007, available at http://news.detik.com/
berita/787842/bnn-kaji-legalkan-ganja
49. Indonesia Marijuana, Associated Press, 10 July 2007,
available at http://www.aparchive.com/metadata/Indonesia-
Marijuana/38c328a1479480558506333e4477afa2
50. Indonesia Marijuana, Associated Press, 10 July 2007.
51. Indonesia Marijuana, Associated Press, 10 July 2007;
Marijuana OK for seasoning: Kalla, The Jakarta Post, 27
June 2007, available at http://www.thejakartapost.com/
news/2007/06/27/marijuana-ok-seasoning-kalla.html ;
Politican okays marijuana in food, Reuters, 27 June 2007,
available at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-indonesia-
marijuana-idUSJAK19971620070627
52. BNN (2015). Honna, J. (2011), p. 270.
53. The 2014 Joint Regulation refers to the provision of
rehabilitation treatments for “drug addicts and victims of
drug abuse as suspects or convicts who are in the process
of investigation, prosecution, and trial in court”, following a
discussion with Patri Handoyo, a researcher at Intuisi Inc. who
focuses on drug policies and HIV in Indonesia.
54. Decriminalisation refers to the removal of criminal status
from a certain behaviour or action. This does not mean that
the behaviour is legal, as non-criminal penalties may still
be applied. With respect to the drug debate, this concept is
usually used to describe laws addressing personal possession
or use rather than drug supply. Depenalisation refers to
introducing the possibility or policy of closing a criminal case
without proceeding towards punishment, for example as the
case is considered ‘minor’ or prosecution is ‘not in the public
interest’. See: Terms and denitions, in: EMCDDA (2015),
Models for the legal supply of cannabis: recent developments,
availabe at: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/topics/pods/legal-
supply-of-cannabis#panel3
55. Based on a discussion with Totok Yuliyanto, an advocacy
ocer within the Indonesian Drug Users Network, who has
work on pushing for the adequate implementation of the
Circular and other similar non-binding regulations.
56. Hall, W. (2015). ‘What has research over the past
two decades revealed about the adverse health eects of
recreational cannabis use?’, Addiction, 110: 19–35. doi: 10.1111/
add.12703; Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
doi/10.1111/add.12703/full
57. According to the Indonesian government led by
President Joko Widodo, 40-50 people die due to illegal drugs
on a daily basis in Indonesia, and that approximately 4,5
million people need to be rehabilitated. These numbers,
however, have been repeatedly questioned due to its
problematic research methodology. See: Data used by
Indonesia to justify drug laws is ‘questionable’, say experts, The
Guardian, 5 June 2015, available at http://www.theguardian.
com/world/2015/jun/05/experts-criticise-data-used-by-
indonesia-to-justify-punitive-drugs-policies
58. Sulaiman, Y. (December 2014). Why Jokowi ordered the
execution of drug trackers in Indonesia. The Conversation.
Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/why-jokowi-
ordered-the-execution-of-drug-trackers-in-indonesia-35432
59. Sundaryani, F. S. (February 2015). Government wants
to rehabilitate 100,000 drug addicts in 2015. The Jakarta
Post. Retrieved from http://www.thejakartapost.com/
news/2015/02/01/govt-wants-rehabilitate-100000-drug-
addicts-2015.html
Stoicescu, C. (July 2015). Forced rehabilitation of drug users in
Indonesia is not a solution. The Conversation. Retrieved from
https://theconversation.com/forced-rehabilitation-of-drug-
users-in-indonesia-not-a-solution-43184
60. Amnesty International (2015). Flawed justice: unfair trials
and the death penalty in Indonesia, p. 7 and p. 27; available at
https://www.amnestyusa.org/sites/default/les/awed-justice-
indonesia-2015.pdf
61. Honna, J. (2011), p. 269.
62. National Narcotic Board Republic of Indonesia. (n.d.)
alternative development programme for cannabis growers in the
province of Aceh, Republic of Indonesia.
63. Mae Fah Luang Foundation (2010). International outreach
– Aceh Province, Republic of Indonesia. Retrieved from http://
www.maefahluang.org/index.php?option=com_exicontent&vi
ew=items&cid=70%3Ainternational-outreach&id=111%3Aaceh-
province-the-republic-of-indonesia-&Itemid=95&lang=en
64. Cauchon, D. (n.d.) Indonesia’s “bloodthirsty” president
orders 64 drug oenders executed. The Clemency Report.
Retrieved from http://clemencyreport.org/indonesia-execute-
64-drug-oenders/
65. Afrida, N. (January 2016). BNN wants farmers to stop
growing marijuana. The Jakarta Post. Retrieved from http://
www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/01/07/bnn-wants-
farmers-stop-growing-marijuana.html
66. Bundang, R. B. (June 2014). Six solons co-author
medical cannabis bill. House of Representative, Republic of The
Philippines. Retrieved from http://www.congress.gov.ph/press/
details.php?pressid=7946
Echaluce, C. C. L. (November 2015). Group vows to pursue
approval of medical marijuana bill. Manila Bulletin. Retrieved
from http://www.mb.com.ph/group-vows-to-pursue-approval-
of-medical-marijuana-bill/

TNI’s Drugs & Democracy programme analyses drug policies and trends in the
illicit drugs market. TNI examines the underlying causes of drug production and
consumption and the impacts of current drug policies on conict, development,and
democracy. The programme facilitates dialogue and advocates evidence-based policies,
guided by principles of harm reduction and human rights for users and producers.
CONTRIBUTORS
AUTHORS: Dania Putri and Tom Blickman
EDITORS: Angela Burton
PUBLICATION DETAILS
Contents of the report may be quoted or reproduced for non-commercial purposes,
provided that the source of information is properly cited http://www.tni.org/copyright
TRANSNATIONAL INSTITUTE (TNI)
De Wittenstraat 25, 1052 AK Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tel: +31-20-6626608, Fax: +31-20-6757176
E-mail: drugs@tni.org
www.tni.org/drugs
@DrugLawReform
Drugsanddemocracy
The Transnational Institute (TNI) is an international research and advocacy
institute committed to building a just, democratic and sustainable world.
For more than 40 years, TNI has served as a unique nexus between social
movements, engaged scholars and policy makers.
www.TNI.org