•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   
•    EYEWITNESS   

A tobacco plantation owner on Thursday challenged the 2009 Health Law which categorized tobacco as addictive substance at the Constitutional Court.

A clause within the law classifies products containing tobacco in any form as addictive substances. It says that usage of addictive substances could bring harm to the person or those around him or her.

The clause had caused a controversy last year after it was found that although it was on the final draft of the law, the clause was missing when the law was issued. The House of Representatives had attributed the discrepancy to an administrative error and the clause was reinserted.

“Why is it that tobacco is the only agricultural product to be categorized as addictive?” said Bambang Sukarno, the applicant. “There are many farming products that are also addictive and could also potentially degrade people’s health such as grapes and marijuana. Why not ban them?”

Bambang lives in Temanggung, a major tobacco producing region, and owns a tobacco plantation that he said was “big enough for the livelihood of several people.”

Indonesia has one of the highest percentage of smokers in the world, with various studies putting the number of smokers as high as 35 percent or more of the population.

Tobacco farming, Bambang said, “has been our people’s landmark in Temanggung district. I represent many farmers there as well as tobacco farmers’ associations requesting the article to be annulled.”

He said that the article might endanger the livelihood of many people, as it did not support the tobacco business.

“Instead of imposing limitations on tobacco products, the government should protect this specific plant,” Bambang said. “Besides the product has helped move our economic wheels and all Indonesians feel the benefit of this.”

In 2008, there were 2.4 million tobacco farmers and 1.5 million clove farmers nationwide.

Bambang also argued that the law was not in harmony with other laws such as the agriculture farming system law. “We want it to be annulled because it has massive impact on people’s lifes.”

Constitutional Court judge Muhammad Alim said that in order to have a stronger case, the applicant should have aimed at other, related clauses, including one requiring safety in the use of addictive substances that could endanger personal and family health as well as the environment, and one that says the production and distribution of addictive substances should be standardized.

Last September, the Constitutional Court rejected a ban on cigarette advertising on television as requested by the National Commission for Child Protection (Komnas Anak). At the time, Judge Arsyad Sanusi said it would be acting unfairly if it only focused on the negative impacts of cigarettes while ignoring the views of cigarette producers, tobacco farmers, the advertising industry and other related businesses.

Husna Zahir, head of Indonesian Consumer Protection Foundation (YLKI), told the Jakarta Globe that people often viewed tobacco as they viewed essentials such as rice, oil and sugar.

“It has to be specifically mentioned as an addictive substance to change this perception, as scientifically it really is addictive,” Husna said. “The law actually did not fully ban tobacco. It is not to stop the industry, but to protect people from being exposed to the smoke.”