The trial and conviction of a teenager who stole a pair of flip-flops in the Central Sulawesi capital of Palu on Wednesday has sent out the wrong message about law enforcement in the country.
It is true that the police, prosecutors and the judge conducted their jobs in accordance with the judicial mechanism in place to uphold the law in the case of the 15-year-old boy, identified as AAL, who was found guilty of stealing a police officer's flip-flops.
The judge decided to send AAL back to his parents despite the verdict, but this sentence did little to repair the public's growing distrust in the judicial system, which was partly seen in the movement to collect 1,000 rubber sandals as a protest against the trial.
Considering the many high-profile cases which have been moving to nowhere only because they implicate prominent – and powerful – figures, the trial of AAL constitutes a mockery of justice. Instead of substantiating the country's adherence to equality before the law, the legal process the boy endured is a further display of discrimination that allows those with power and money to escape justice.
Not to mention physical abuses the minor suffered during his interrogation. The National Police ordered a 21-day detention of two police officers for beating AAL, but the sentence serves only as a reminder that the culture of violence remains intact within the police force.
That the public demonstrated distaste with the legal process against AAL should not be understood as their defense of a crime, however petty. There were countless precedents in which the sword of justice was sharp when dealing with the powerless like the teenager, but suddenly blunt when confronting the powerful.
A poor old woman was brought to court in the Central Java town of Banyumas in 2009 for allegedly stealing cocoa fruits which cost no less than Rp 10,000 (US$11.00). The panel of judges convicted her and handed down a suspended jail term.
In the same year, a woman was sentenced to 24 days' imprisonment for stealing 2 kilograms of cotton valued at Rp 20,000 in Batang, also in Central Java.
It comes as no surprise that the public used to react angrily to strict enforcement of the law against ordinary people who could not hire top lawyers but followed the whole course of the trial. The public has oftentimes witnessed corrupt state officials receive relatively light sentences compared to the state funds they stole, an serve only a small part of their jail terms due to generous remissions for their "good behavior".
There is even a politician who was convicted of graft three times, but instead of serving long, accumulated jail terms he was quickly back to breathing the air of freedom thanks to multiple remissions.
Doubts over indiscriminate enforcement of the law will persist unless the National Police or other law enforcement agencies dare to launch a formal investigation into suspicious large bank accounts belonging to a number of police generals, public figures named in corruption cases centering on former Democratic Party treasurer Muhammad Nazaruddin or individuals and institutions that received money from the rescued Bank Century.
There are many high-profile cases that have remained untouched and we are worried they may be settled through political deals due to their potential to disrupt stability.
The flip-flop case reminds us all that we still have a long way to go before achieving equality before the law. We can find those words in our 66-year-old Constitution, but sadly not yet in reality.