Legal Literacy - The acid attack on Andrie Yunus should not be seen merely as ordinary abuse. Andrie's position as Deputy Coordinator of KontraS, coupled with the context of the attack after he was known to be vocal in criticizing the expansion of the military's role in the civilian sphere, places this case at the intersection of criminal law, judicial jurisdiction, and the protection of human rights defenders. As of March 18, 2026, four TNI soldiers have been named as suspects, and the TNI Military Police have stated that this case is being processed in a military court with charges under Article 467 of the Criminal Code.

The Criminal Qualification Should Not Be Oversimplified

The first thing that must be straightened out is the legal basis used. Because the attack occurred on March 12, 2026, while the National Criminal Code has been in effect since January 2, 2026, the main analysis should be based on Law Number 1 of 2023, not the old Criminal Code. In the new regime, premeditated abuse is regulated in Article 467, severe abuse in Article 468, severe premeditated abuse in Article 469, premeditated murder in Article 459, attempt in Article 17, and complicity in Article 20.

Therefore, pouring corrosive substances on the face area should not be directly treated as ordinary abuse that is read minimally. So far, the authorities have only mentioned Article 467 as an entry point. However, prescriptively, investigators should not stop there. The type of substance used, the target area, the volume of liquid, the degree of injury, and the pattern of attack preparation must be seriously tested to determine whether this case deserves to be pushed to a heavier construction. If medical and forensic evidence confirms serious injuries and planning, then Article 469 should be tested. If the evidence shows that the perpetrator was aware of and accepted the deadly risk of the attack, then the possibility of Article 459 juncto Article 17 is also worth considering.