Camelia Pasandaran – The Constitutional Court on Thursday struck the phrase "offensive treatment" from Article 335 Indonesia's criminal code, declaring the vague wording unconstitutional.

"[We are] declaring the phrase 'by any other battery or by offensive treatment' in Article of 335, Subarticle 1 of the 1946 Criminal Code as against the 1945 Constitution," Constitutional Court chief Hamdan Zoelva said on Thursday, according to the court website. The ruling has left several ongoing cases based on the phrasing in limbo.

Prior to the revision, the article read: "By imprisonment of one year maximum or a fine of 300 Rupiah [$0.0249] maximum shall be punished: first, any person who unlawfully coerces another though force, through any other battery or through offensive treatment or through the threat of force, any other battery, or offensive treatment, aimed either against another person or against a third party, to do, to omit or to tolerate something."

Judge Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi ruled that the phrase "any other battery or offensive treatment" was impossible to approach objectively. "All crimes of course are offensive and there's no pleasant impact of crime," he said. "Therefore, it was not clearly distinct from other crimes."

He said that phrasing opened a door for misused on the part of police or prosecutors and was too imprecise to find firm footing in the constitution.

University of Indonesia law professor Harkristuti Harkrisnowo compared the article to a trash can. "You can categorize any treatment as offensive depending on the person's view," Harkristuti told the Jakarta Globe.

"Indeed, it can be misused for various purposes." Harkristuti, who is also a director general of human rights at the Justice and Human Rights Ministry, said that the Constitutional Court was correct to remove the wording.

"For example, I can report you for 'offensive treatment' for calling and interviewing me while I was having my dinner," she said. "It's vague in comparison to articles about stealing, which is clearly against the law."

Police expert Bambang Widodo Umar told the Jakarta Globe that the article had long been used for subjective, sometimes political reasons. "That is a subjective article, and it's good that the applicant filed for the judicial review so people of this democratic nation can learn to accept different opinions and not consider them to be crimes," he said.

Suspects have been charged under the article in two ongoing cases. Sitok Srengenge, a noted poet, was reported by a student under the article for allegedly refused to take the responsibility when the student became pregnant with his child.

In the other case, a suspect was charged after a fight with neighbors. Yayan Nurhayati, 43, was imprisoned under the article for punching a neighbor who claimed that Yayan's father had thrown garbage into the neighbor's house.

Both Harkristuti and Bambang said that the ongoing "offensive treatment" cases would be terminated. "If the phrase has been annulled, then the cases should be stopped," Bambang said.

Harkristuti said that as the Constitutional Court ruling was legally binding. "With the Constitutional Court's decision, it's no longer valid," she said. "Rather than causing the police confusion, it's better to stop the investigations."

Oei Alimin Sukamto Wijaya, a man who was detained for "offensive treatment," initially submitted the law for review.