Legal Literacy - It needs to be emphasized from the outset that this writing completely disassociates itself from any political affiliations or preferences. The analysis presented within is a juridical examination rooted purely in the rules and doctrines of legal science understood by the author, which aims to make a conceptual demarcation between two different domains: the realm of discretion in state administrative law (beleidsvrijheid) and the realm of abuse of authority offenses in corruption criminal law.

A paradigmatic error has occurred in law enforcement, where the demarcation line between the two has become blurred. This blurring dangerously opens the door for a phenomenon known as policy criminalization, which is the process of dragging public officials' actions that fall within the scope of administrative law into the confines of criminal law.

The indictment addressed to the former Minister of Trade Thomas Trikasih Lembong is the most relevant and factual example of this phenomenon, so his name is used as a case study. However, the focus of this analysis is not on his personal figure. If a case with a similar construction occurred to another individual, then the entire juridical analysis in this writing would still apply the same.

The construction of the indictment against him essentially does not question the substantive errors of the sugar import policy, but rather views the choice of policy instrument—namely appointing a private party instead of a state-owned enterprise—as a modus operandi of the crime itself. The action is suspected of being an unlawful act and/or abuse of authority as formulated in Article 2 and Article 3 of the Anti-Corruption Law. This case, therefore, becomes a precedent that can create a 'chilling effect' that paralyzes all public officials: if an official is convicted only because of his policy choices, who else will dare to make decisions in this country?