Drugs, Death, Despair: Analysing Discourse over the Use of Capital Punishment for Drug Offences in Indonesia

Abstract

In 2014, the Indonesian President, Joko Widodo, declared the “war on drugs.” Despite global abolitionist movements, Indonesia has maintained its firm stance on the death penalty for drug offences. This study aims to examine the discursive struggle over the use of capital punishment for drug offences in Indonesia by analysing the discourse used by the government and the counter-discourse actors and delineating the consequences of the discourse. The counter-discourse actors include the National Commission on Human Rights, local NGOs, and human rights activists. Using a qualitative research method applying Foucauldian discourse analysis and incorporating discourse analysis concepts by Laclau and Mouffe, this study unfolded the hegemonic discourse articulated by the government and the subsequent challenges posed by counter-discourse actors. The findings reveal that the government constantly reproduced and articulated the threat, emergency, war, and capital punishment discourses. The capital punishment discourse is not only a discourse but also a concrete material consequence of the other discourses. Counter-discourse actors challenged the hegemonic discourse using the effectiveness, right to health, and also capital punishment discourses. The government legitimised capital punishment by articulating human rights and deterrence discourse. To challenge it, counter-discourse actors articulated human rights discourse, questioned the efficacy of deterrence, and emphasised the rehabilitative aspect of punishment to delegitimise capital punishment. Islamic discourse was present on both sides to a small extent. Finally, this study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on justice, the protection of human rights, and the development of policies that respect individuals' right to life.