Syekh Puji: Sentenced to 4 Years for Pedophilia...

Pujiono Cahyo Widiyanto (aka Syekh Puji) has been sentenced to four years in prison for procuring a 12-year-old for a sexual relationship. Syekh Puji had been arguing that he had done nothing wrong in God's eyes nor under God's Laws as his 12-year-old bride had begun menstruating before he consummated the marriage.

Syekh Puji is a Muslim and believes that Islam permits his actions. The Syekh also believes that the laws of God are far superior to the laws of 'man'. Men do not have the right to punish him because he has not committed a crime in the eyes of God. The age of consent in Indonesia for females is 16-years-old. The law does not make any exceptions for early puberty or menstruation, or even parental consent.

Well, it would seem that despite his protestations to the counter, the judges of the courts of men (and women) in Semarang decided that the Syekh was in fact guilty of having sex with a minor, Lutfiana Ulfa. It goes without saying that Syekh Puji will appeal this decision. This was confirmed by O.C. Kaligis, the Syekh's lawyer. Kaligis is getting some varied and interesting work of late. Kaligis is also the lawyer for Ariel of Peterpan fame. Ariel is currently on trial in Bandung for his alleged role in the distribution of a couple of home-made sex tapes.

It will be interesting to see what the grounds for appeal are. The law is pretty explicit with respect to the age of consent. So, it is unclear at this point as to where the court may have erred in rendering its judgment.

Pedophilia vs. Distribution of Porn...

This must surely be an anomaly, right? Prosecutors are seeking to have Ariel jailed for 16 years for his alleged involvement in distributing a couple of home made sex tapes, yet the same office of public prosecutors are seeking a mere 6 years for a pedophile Muslim cleric. Go figure.

Does this mean that the distribution of pornography is a far more serious offense than pedophilia? Or is it that because Sheikh Puji has a legitimate argument that underage marriage is permissible in Islam thereby in some way mitigating the seriousness of the breach as it exists under state law?

These are serious questions for Indonesia to answer. It is high time that the president took the high moral ground and involved himself in these sorts of matters and made unequivocal statements as to what it means to be Indonesian. He should also stand up and say "sorry, but the sexual abuse of children is wrong! There is no excuse for it, there is nothing to mitigate the actions of a perpetrator, and anyone committing these crimes will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law". Hopefully, the full extent of the law is a little more than 6 years.

I have posted on Pujiono Cahyo Widiyanto and his marriage to Lutfiana Ulfa. A simple search of the blog will reveal those posts. Here are the essential facts as I recall them: he is 45-years-old and she is 12-years-old (at the time of the marriage), he owns and operates a Muslim Boarding school and uses that to call himself a cleric, he is wealthy, Lutfiana's parents had financial dealings and debts with him, he argues that God's law trumps the laws of man, and in any event she has reached puberty so in a medical sense she is no longer a child.

Perhaps prosecutors could use Article 5(3) of Law No. 1 of 1951 to prosecute the Sheikh as well?

Syekh Puji and the Office of the Attorney General...

The Office of the Attorney General (AGO) has stated that it intends to appeal against the preliminary decision handed down by the Ungaran District Court in the case of child sexual abuse against Pujiantocahyo Widianto or Syekh Puji as he is known by his followers.

The Ungaran District Court dismissed the indictment for being incomplete and vague. The rationale of the court was that the indictment failed to detail explicitly how and when the offenses were committed. Presumably, the prosecutors failed, according to the court, to get into the nitty gritty of detailing what type of sex was had, when the sexual intercourse occurred, and where. Any amended indictment that seeks to satisfy the court in this regard is certainly going to make for interesting reading.

Albeit, it seems that the trend to explicit detail in indictments regarding sexual activity has already been started by the AGO in the case against Antasari Azhar in the South Jakarta District Court. The indictment read out by the prosecutors in the Antasari case caused some controversy as it was the first time the sexual practices of a former public official were entered into the court records. The indictment detailed Antasari's need for some hand relief (also known as a happy ending or being masturbated) from someone else's wife. For which he paid USD 500.

Back to the Syekh. The AGO is going to appeal to the Central Java High Court seeking the court to overturn the ruling. If they are successful in their appeal, then the Central Java High Court is most likely to order the matter to proceed in the Ungaran District Court. The appeal is based on a cause of action that the court / judges erred in their application of the relevant laws. Simply, the indictment is not flawed but the legal reasoning of the judges is flawed in this case.

The dismissal of the indictment against the Syekh poses an interesting dilemma. The girl in this case is a girl at just 12-years of age when the Syekh married her. So, there is seemingly a prima facie case on which to proceed. The dismissal of the indictment, by default, says that there is no case on which to proceed. Therefore, the dilemma is whether or not this dismissal can be read as condoning and legalizing pedophilia in Indonesia?

It is clear under the marriage law that a child of 12 years of age cannot marry. It is also pretty clear that the parents of a 12-year-old would encounter some legal obstacles in condoning such a marriage. The Child Protection Law explicitly states that a child is a child until they reach the age of 18. So, to allow this decision to stand unchallenged sets a bad precedent. The AGO has an obligation to pursue this through higher courts.

Interestingly, it would seem that the argument that the practice of marriage according to the rules of Islam trumps any national laws that are in place that would seemingly prohibit such practices. There is some debate about whether Islam of the 21st Century still condones the marriage practices of the 7th Century as they relate to child brides. However, the Ungaran District Court decision has added a new dynamic to the framework of the argument.

It would seem though that, at least in the interim, the Syekh is free to go about his daily business as a handicraft exporter and husband to a child bride.

Syekh Puji Goes To Trial (and gets acquitted)...

Syekh Puji went to trial in the Ungaran District Court charged with committing sexual abuse on a child. The sexual abuse charges stem from his marriage to an underage girl. I have written about this case elsewhere, and you can find those posts here.

In essence, the Syekh was facing charges relating to violations of Articles 81(2) and 82 of the Child Protection Law and Article 290 of the Indonesian Criminal Code. I also believe that there are charges relating to a violation of the Marriage Law. I have not seen the indictment or read the verdict dismissing the case.

However, the presiding judge in the trial, Hari Mulyanto, dismissed the prosecution case because, in his opinion, the indictment was incomplete, vague, and by default, flawed. Consequently, Mulyanto ordered that the Syekh was free to go and resume his life free of the charges laid. In that sense it is not really an acquittal, because in a technical sense the judge has issued a preliminary ruling stating that the case cannot go forward to trial because the indictment does not make the grade.

Prosecutors, apparently, intend to appeal the verdict. But, what is interesting was that the prosecution seemed to indicate that they will go away and improve the indictment. This suggests that the first time out the prosecutors did not bother to cross all the "t"s and dot all the "i"s.

Appeals in Indonesia generally require that there be new evidence available that was not available at the time of the trial or that there has been an error by the judge(s) in the application of the law. Unfortunately, prosecutors failing to do their jobs is not new evidence or an error in the application of the law.

There seems to be little doubt that the Syekh married an underage girl, and there seems little doubt that he consummated that marriage after her first period, what seems to be in doubt is the ability of the prosecutors to close the deal on this case.

Syekh Puji Goes To Trial...

Pujiono Cahyono Widianto who is also known as Syekh Puji (Syech Puji) has finally gone to trial for marrying a 12-year-old, Lutfiana Ulfa, back in Ausgust 2008. The trial is being held in Central Java at the Ungaran District Court. Puji has been charged and indicted under two articles; art. 88 of Law 2002 (Child Protection Law) and art. 290 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP).

Each of the articles carry a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years. Puji is not expected to receive the maximum sentence. Though it would be a worthy statement that there is no religious exception to the laws of marriage, the protection of children, or the committing of crimes. Nevertheless, there will always be those that argue the laws of man (for want of a gender neutral term) will always be trumped by the laws of God.

The trial is being held behind closed doors. There is some argument as to whether this is necessary because the identity of the perpetrator of the alleged crime and the victim have both been revealed publicly and their photos splashed across the world's media pages. Nevertheless, Indonesian law generally protects the identity of minors involved in criminal matters, both as victims and as perpetrators. I have a picture of them both, but have opted for the one above. Perhaps this is what he is paying OC Kaligis to represent him.

If I was ever going to practice law in Indonesia and I was keen to practice criminal law, then OC Kaligis would be one advocate that I would try and convince to employ me. He gets plenty of interesting work. That is not to say that I would be keen to defend Syekh Puji, but I am a firm believer that everyone is entitled to get the best possible representation available, irrespective of their ability to pay. Obviously, the Syekh can pay!

This case and trial might be a little difficult for me to follow from Sydney, but I will do my best.

Syekh Puji, Lutfiana Ulfa, and Pregnancy

It is being reported that Lutfiana Ulfa, the 12-year-old bride of Syekh Puji, is already pregnant. I have written about this case here.

In a legal sense this case is a simple one. There are clear violations of the law which are punishable and the Syekh must be investigated and then prosecuted according to those provisions. There can be no ifs, buts, or maybes here. The man by all definitions is a pedophile and a man with a plan to marry more children if and when he has the chance. This makes him a serial pedophile.

There has been a suggestion that the Syekh has handed Lutfiana back to her parents and feels that this returns things to their previous state and absolves him of any further legal troubles. The law has been broken and sending the girl home does not repair that damage.

The video link above (in Indonesian) seems to indicate that there has been no divorce, although I am not sure how you dissolve a marriage that could never have taken place legally.

To the contrary, the lawyers for the Syekh and the Chair of the National Child Protection Commission indicate that the Syekh needs to be patient and wait until Lutfiana is at least 16 years of age. Hence the reason for returning her to her family.

If it turns out that Lutfiana is really pregnant then this whole affair takes on a completely different dimension. Lutfiana continues to profess her love for the Syekh and if the Syekh is the father of her child, then I would not see this love diminishing in the short-term. I am not sure that a 12-year-old knows love outside of perhaps a love for a parent. However, I am not going to judge the girl or what she believes that she feels for this man.

The outcome of this case is still far from clear.

Syekh Puji, Indonesian Law, Pedophilia

Hopefully once the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (Komisi Perlindungan Anak Indonesia / KPAI) make their report to police about Syekh Puji and his marriage to a 12-year-old, the police will have the testicular fortitude to throw the book at this pedophile.

The KPAI team that went to Semarang seem to think that they have sufficient evidence that the marriage was consummated. To be legally correct the fact finding team uses the words very likely that the Syekh had slept with his child bride, Lutfiana Ulfa.

There seems little doubt that this is a valid marriage in the sense of a religious marriage or as it is generally known, kawin siri. However, it is not a valid marriage in terms of Indonesian law. It would be a hard slog to try and prove that a kawin siri type marriage between a 43-year-old man and a 12-year-old girl is recognized in the Marriage Law (Law No. 1 of 1974 -- soft copy in Indonesia if anyone wants it). This would still be the case even where the parents or guardians are said to have given their approval.

What makes this case even more bizarre and sickening than it already is, is the manner in which the whole affair has been played out. Lutfiana was the winner of a bride selection competition where one of the judges was the Syekh's current wife (this would make her complicit in the procurement of a child for sexual exploitation) and some of his followers (also complicit in the procurement of a minor for sex).

This gets even more perverse when one learns that the parents are in considerable financial difficulty and as such were glad that the daughter was chosen. The only thing that could make this even more bizarre and sad is if the parents financial difficulties were in some way related to the man that they eventually sold their daughter to.

The implication quite clearly is that there was a transaction involved in that the parents are in financial difficulties and then not so after marrying off the daughter. This I need to check further because the parents have only said that they hope it improves their financial position and not that it already has.

The KPAI is hoping that the Police will act on this and charge all those involved under Articles 81 - 83 of the Child Protection Law. These articles in essence prohibit the procurement of child for sex. The articles would provide for a term of imprisonment of up to 15 years and a fine in the vicinity of IDR 250 million, if I recall correctly. I need to look at the law (soft copies in Indonesian and English, I think).

The KPAI reckon that before they can call the man a pedophile they would need to get a psychological test. This is one of those shake your head moments. The KPAI are one of the few to do something about this predator and then they come out with the idea they need to psychologically test the man before they can be sure that he is a pedophile.

The evidence speaks for itself. He is married to a 12-year-old and is looking to procure a 9-year-old and a 7-year-old as his next wives. For my mind there is no need to do psychological test on this man, he is a serial predator, a molester of children, a rapist of children, and worthy of jail time. I hear that the inmates of jails have a special liking for men who interfere with children.

The idea that this man is in some way right because he claims he is doing nothing different from the Prophet is ludicrous. He is not the Prophet for starters and has not been granted any special privileges in this regard. Even a cursory reading of the Suras and the Hadiths would highlight that Muhammad was granted special privileges in the marriage game.

It is also pretty likely that Muhammad only slept with his first two wives (I have been talking to people about this offline and learning a thing or two along the way) and that the Hadiths suggest that Muhammad's marriage practices were not to be followed. In fact there is specific mention of not having more than four wives (strict conditions for more than one) and that children are not to be married (I am sure that there will be a reader out there somewhere that can enlighten me on whether I am close to the mark or way off base -- constructive comments welcome because I want to learn more).

It is time that more people came out against this practice. It does not matter that it is rare. What matters is that it happens and it must not. The children of this world are our future, they are our hopes and dreams, and no man (or woman) has a right to strip a child of that future under any circumstances, ever!

Child Brides -- Indonesia

There are plenty of ways to get media attention in Indonesia. One of the best is to publicly announce you have married a 12-year-old and intend to take a 9-year-old and a 7-year-old in the near future as wives.

In most places this would be serial pedophilia and the perpetrator would be investigated and prosecuted and hopefully jailed.

It should be noted that this is not an attack on Indonesia alone. I have written about the child bride practice in Yemen here. You can find other commentary here.

There are many urging the police to take immediate action in terms of investigating the cleric, Pujiono Cahyo Widianto (AKA Syekh Puji), for breaches of the Child Protection Law, the Marriage Law, the Labor Law, and most obviously the Criminal Code.

The Child Protection Law states that the parents of a child cannot marry them off until the child has reached at least 18 years of age. The Marriage Law sets an age of 16 with the parents consent. The breach of the Labor law relates to the allegation that Puji has made his new bride, Lutfiana Ulfa, a Managing Director (or something similar) in one of his companies. The Criminal Code prohibits sexual contact with minors.

There would seem to be some inconsistency between the Child Protection Law and the Marriage Law in terms of age. This is potentially a Constitutional Court issue in terms of determining which age is the appropriate age.

In terms of the Marriage Law individually. The Marriage Law recognizes marriages know as kawin siri. This type of marriage is one that is valid under one's religion. If this particular marriage is a kawin siri one then this raises a whole range of issues that warrant a much longer debate and post than I intend to make here.

However, suffice to say, if the parents provide their permission for the marriage to take place, the parents are of sound mind and body, then should the state be in a position to take their parenting rights away?

It would seem that there is much more to this story than a simple run of the mill kawin siri. I am sure that the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (Komisi Perlindungan Anak Indonesia / KPAI), who have sent a team to investigate, will produce a report that will enlighten us a little further as to what transpired in this case.

Claims of child exploitation are interesting as the parents seemed to have agreed. If there was a transaction involved, a dowry for instance, would this be consistent with child trafficking? Just throwing that out there.

It seems the Syekh's reasons for marrying are varied but primary among these is his self-proclaimed penchant for liking little girls. The reason is that he can "educate" them to become great people. Maybe this is true.

However, he does not need to marry them to educate them and make them great people. He could just as easily facilitate their education through university, ensure that their parents have sufficient resources to provide a good home and good nutrition. The Syekh obviously has the resources to do this as he recently disbursed some IDR 1.2 billion as alms this past Eid.

Nah, I think it has more to do with that he enjoys having sex with children. He has chosen to dress this up as something that is permissible under his religion and it is so because the prophet did it. It is amusing in a really sad way that the Syekh equates himself to the prophet and that he thinks that the times have not changed.

This is not a justification for the prophet's actions rather a statement as to what may or may not have been acceptable then is not acceptable now. However, "acceptable" is relative and there are some who do not have a problem with what the Syekh has done or is planning to do. One of these people who does not have a problem with it is a member of parliament and a representative of the Prosperous Justice Party or PKS.

The Chair of the Indonesia Ulemas Council (MUI), Umar Shihab, has come out and said he is troubled by the marriage. His troubles are not an outright condemnation of the marriage. His statements go along the lines of he cannot see why the Syekh needs to marry a 12-year-old when there are so many older women available for marriage. Shihab then goes on to suggest that it is important that the reasons for the marriage be made clear and that it is OK to marry in order to protect yourself from sin.

This is most certainly not the required condemnation for the sexual exploitation of children that the MUI needs to be putting out there into the public sphere. It seems that the biggest hurdle is that some just cannot reconcile that the actions of the prophet some 1400 years ago no longer the way of the 21st Century.

Those that support this will never get past. "well the prophet married Aisha when she was just a child", which is simply an argument, "if it was good enough for the prophet then it must be good enough for us". A silly argument that seems more like a call to rationalize and justify modern day pedophilia than it is to protect some kind of sacred institution or practice.

In a cynical and sarcastic way it is too bad for followers of other religions that their prophets or founders chose not to take child brides. Then we could simply run away from the fact that we have men sexually exploiting children and hide behind some religious excuse that it is OK. It is not OK and it is time the practice was explicitly forbidden.

It is time for Muslim scholars to state unequivocally that the actions of Muhammad had their time and place back then but there is no justification for actions such as the practice of taking child brides in the 21st Century. The MUI could lead the charge on this in Indonesia.

For me there are lots of issues.

Simply, girls are not ready to become wives and are not prepared mentally, emotionally, or physically for being married. According to most reports, Ulfa has already menstruated and if the Syekh is as good as his religious word then this means that he has already slept with her. I just cannot bring my mind to the idea that a 12-year-old is in any way ready to become a parent herself. I know some 30-year-olds that are not ready for the challenge.

The second issue runs on from the first in a sense that being married at 12 rips away any normalcy of childhood. If you take a step back and think for a minute of two about your childhood, good or bad, this is the time that you develop, you grow, and you have fun with your peers, it is where you start to gain your life experiences that make you what you are as an adult. For Ulfa it would seem that her childhood or teenage years are destined to be a revolving door of pregnancies and isolation from her peers.

Let's face it, you do not usually see married and pregnant girls in year 7 or 8 of high school.

When push comes to shove, if this marriage has in fact taken place, then this marriage should be rejected and rejected with prejudice. The man should be investigated, prosecuted, and jailed for the sexual abuse of a minor. This can happen even without the MUI and others having the testicular fortitude to come out and openly say this is wrong no matter the circumstances proclaimed as being justification are.

Whether law enforcement is endowed with the courage to make a statement on the application of the rule of law in Indonesia by seeing this individual is punished for all breaches of the prevailing laws and regulations remains to be seen.

Being the eternal optimist then I will always remain hopeful that this person will be punished for his crimes.