Pros and Cons of Government Regulation Number 70 of 2020 concerning Chemical Castration

The imposition of additional punishment of chemical castration was approved by the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (KPAI), because it is considered a preventive measure and a deterrent effect for perpetrators who repeat their actions. The KPAI Commissioner assesses that Government Regulation Number 70 of 2020 can provide legal certainty and become a stronger basis for law enforcement officials in carrying out punishments for the implementation of chemical castration, announcement of the perpetrator's identity, and installation of electronic detectors on convicted child sexual abusers.

Meanwhile, those who reject the imposition of punishment chemical castration is because there is a potential conflict of norms with other laws, namely Law Number 5 of 1998 concerning the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Law on Human Rights.

The implementation of castration law is an act of torture for the perpetrator and is considered contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, namely in Article 28 G paragraph 2 which reads "every person has the right to be free from torture that degrades human dignity and has the right to obtain political asylum from another country". As well as Article 33 paragraph 1 of Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights which states that "everyone has the right to be free from torture, punishment, or cruel, inhuman treatment that degrades human dignity".

Komnas Perempuan (National Commission on Violence Against Women) opposes the Government Regulation on Chemical Castration because the implementation of this punishment is contrary to the philosophy and purpose of criminalization which aims to prevent and rehabilitate criminals. Castration will not achieve this goal because sexual violence against children occurs due to unequal power relations, either because of their age or the perpetrator's perspective on the victim. Chemical castration is not justified in the system criminal law national or the purpose of criminalization adopted by the Indonesian legal system. Then, related to sexual violence, it occurs not only because of libido or for sexual satisfaction, but can occur as a form of conquest, expression of inferiority, anger or venting revenge. Thus, controlling sexual hormones does not solve sexual violence.

In addition, chemical castration also has medical risks and is contrary to the Medical Code of Ethics (Hippocratic Oath) and the universally applicable medical profession discipline, which causes the Indonesian Doctors Association (IDI) to refuse to be the executor. Medical discipline and ethics are certainly inherent in the medical profession everywhere. Doctors who are not affiliated with IDI are also bound by this ethic, as are police and military doctors.