Police
fail to halt trade in wildlife
Saturday,
April 27, 2002
Rendi A. Witular, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
Enforcement of laws protecting rare species in
Indonesia is still a bridge too far, as the authorities
are often afraid to take the violators to court, or even
just question them.
This was illustrated on Friday, when the city police,
along with the wildlife police from the Ministry of
Forestry, carried out a raid on a house belonging to Andi
Saibah.
In the house, located on Jl. Iskandarsyah II no.2,
South Jakarta, the police found a stuffed two-meter-long
Sumatran tiger.
The police, however, did not question Andi nor process
her case any further as, they stated, she had not been
aware that possessing the stuffed animal was illegal
according to Article No. 5/1990 of the law on natural
resources and ecosystem conservation, which carries a
maximum penalty of one year's imprisonment or a Rp 50
million fine.
"We must have some understanding here. Andi
honestly admitted that she was ignorant of the law and,
furthermore, was willing to hand over the tiger to the
police.
"What more can we expect? There's also another
thing: She could put us in an "awkward"
position," said Adj. Comr. Heru Santoso, team leader
of the raid, who refused to elaborate on what he meant by
"awkward".
Meanwhile, Andi, who is a widow of a senior government
official, refused to comment on the matter.
The raid was based on an investigation carried out by
nongovernmental organization Animal Conservation for Life
(KSBK), led by Hardi Baktiantoro.
According to Hardi, the owner of the tiger had sought a
buyer prepared to pay Rp 2.5 million (US$266) for it.
Hardi was disappointed with the raid as the police had
not processed the matter any further.
"Well, the police were too scared to proceed with
the case. This is a bad precedent in the enforcement of
law protecting wildlife and rare species. However, we will
continue with other investigations, even if the police do
not support our campaign. The stuffed tiger was about five
years old, so the violator should have been charged under
Article No.5/1990," said Hardi.
Subsequently, the tiger was not confiscated but taken
to the city police headquarters as it had by then been
donated to them.