12-9-2024 (JAKARTA) The case of I Nyoman Sukena, a Balinese man facing a potential five-year prison sentence for keeping endangered porcupines, has ignited a fierce debate across Indonesia about the application of wildlife protection laws. The controversy has drawn attention to the delicate balance between conservation efforts and the rights of local communities.
Sukena’s ordeal began in early March when police arrested him for keeping four Javanese porcupines (Hystrix javanica) at his home in Bongkasa Pertiwi Village, Badung, Bali. He was charged with violating Indonesia’s law on the conservation of biological natural resources and their ecosystems, which carries a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment.
The case gained national attention after a video of Sukena crying hysterically during his trial at the Denpasar District Court on 5 September went viral on social media. The emotional footage struck a chord with many Indonesians, who viewed the charges against Sukena as disproportionate and unjust.
According to reports, Sukena’s father-in-law had found the porcupines in a plantation five years ago. The family had been caring for the animals ever since, with Sukena taking over their care after his father-in-law’s death. Under his stewardship, the original pair of porcupines mated and produced two offspring.
Sukena maintains that he was unaware that keeping porcupines was illegal. His plight has resonated with many Indonesians who feel that the law is being applied too harshly in this instance. Social media campaigns supporting Sukena have proliferated, with hashtags like #KamiBersamaSukena (“We are with Sukena”) trending across various platforms.
The case has also drawn criticism from politicians and legal experts. Ni Putu Candra Dewi, a lawyer who shared Sukena’s photo on social media, questioned whether the charges fulfilled “the sense of justice in society.” She argued that the law should be “progressive for the common good” rather than simply punitive.
Rieke Diah Pitaloka, a lawmaker from Indonesia’s ruling Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), compared Sukena’s case unfavourably to corruption cases, which she argued often receive lighter sentences despite causing greater harm to the state. Pitaloka was one of the guarantors who successfully petitioned for Sukena’s release to house arrest on 12 September, pending his next court hearing.
Legal experts have also weighed in on the controversy. Albert Aries, a criminal law expert from Trisakti University, described the five-year charge against Sukena as “excessive.” Aries argued that Sukena should be acquitted, given that the porcupines were well-cared for, breeding successfully, and even used in traditional ceremonies.
Hardjuno Wiwoho, another legal observer, emphasised the importance of judicial discretion in such cases. He argued that judges should apply principles of justice rather than adhering rigidly to the letter of the law. Wiwoho also highlighted the need for better public education about protected species, suggesting that it was reasonable for ordinary citizens to be unaware of such regulations without adequate information campaigns.
The Indonesian government classifies the Javanese porcupine as a protected species due to threats from poaching and habitat loss. These herbivorous animals, native to Java and Bali, are often hunted for their meat, quills, and bezoars – stone-like formations found in their digestive tracts.
Indonesia is home to an estimated 300,000 species of wildlife, representing about 17 per cent of the world’s animals. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) reports that 137 mammal species, 37 reptile species, 26 insect species, and 20 fish species are currently protected under Indonesian law due to their endangered status.
In response to the public outcry over Sukena’s case, the KLHK has pledged to intensify its efforts to educate the public about protected animals. Satyawan Pudyatmoko, the ministry’s director general for natural resources and ecosystem conservation, acknowledged that while many public awareness campaigns have been conducted, there may be a need to “intensify the information efforts for protected animals” in certain areas.
