A vial of hydrochloric acid hurled from a passing motorcycle changes a life forever. On March 12, 2026, Andrie Yunus, a 27-year-old deputy coordinator with the human rights group KontraS, was riding his motorbike through central Jakarta. He had just finished recording a podcast criticizing the expanding power of the Indonesian armed forces (TNI). By the time the liquid stopped burning, Yunus had chemical burns covering 20% of his face and body. He lost sight in his right eye.
Fast forward to June 10, 2026. An Indonesian military court handed down its verdict. Four military intelligence officers stood in the dock. The result? Sentences ranging from a measly 18 months to three years.
If you think three years in prison is a fair price for blinding an activist and permanently scarring his face, you don't understand how justice works in Indonesia. This verdict isn't a victory for accountability. It is a strategic whitewash designed to protect the upper echelons of power while throwing a few low-ranking scapegoats to the wolves.
The Illusion of Military Accountability
The trial looked serious on paper. Four active-duty service members from the Strategic Intelligence Agency (BAIS) were arrested. The head of BAIS, Yudi Abrimantyo, even stepped down to show a "form of responsibility."
But the actual sentences tell a completely different story.
- Sgt. Edi Sudarko: Sentenced to three years and dishonorably discharged. He executed the attack and provoked the others.
- First Lt. Budhi Hariyanto Widhi Cahyono: Sentenced to two and a half years and dishonorably discharged. He came up with the idea to use acid.
- Capt. Nandala Dwi Prasetya: Sentenced to two years for participating passively.
- Air Force First Lt. Sami Lakka: Sentenced to 18 months for participating passively.
Presiding judge Fredy Ferdian Isnartanto labeled their actions "arrogant." Yet, the military prosecutors originally only asked for two and a half years for all defendants, despite the law allowing for up to 12 years for serious premeditated assault. When the prosecution itself doesn't want a heavy sentence, you know the deck is stacked.
The court explicitly ruled that the attack was not influenced by any "chain of command." According to the judges, these men acted entirely on their own "initiative and spontaneity." They were supposedly just "offended and outraged" because Yunus had interrupted a closed-door parliamentary meeting in 2025 to protest revisions to the military law.
Honestly, it's a ridiculous narrative. Military intelligence officers don't just happen to carry vials of hydrochloric acid around to settle personal grudges over parliamentary etiquette.
Why Military Courts Can't Deliver True Justice
Yunus himself refused to attend the trial hearings. He cited health reasons, but more importantly, a profound distrust of the system. He, along with United Nations human rights experts, repeatedly demanded that the case be tried in a civilian court.
They were ignored.
When military personnel commit crimes against civilians in Indonesia, they are almost always tried in military courts. This creates an immediate conflict of interest. The judges are soldiers. The prosecutors are soldiers. The defendants are soldiers.
Human rights organizations like Amnesty International Indonesia have long pointed out that this system shields the broader network. Usman Hamid, executive director of Amnesty International Indonesia, noted that the verdict successfully protects the institutional integrity of the military. It stops any real investigation into who ordered the hit.
By treating this as a case of four rogue soldiers acting on personal offense, the court avoided asking the real question. Who supplied the intelligence? Who authorized the surveillance on Yunus?
The Dangerous Return to a Familiar Era
This isn't happening in a vacuum. The attack on Yunus coincides with a broader, highly concerning political shift in Indonesia under President Prabowo Subianto.
Just a day before this verdict, Parliament passed a revision to the national police law. Critics argue this grants the police sweeping powers, echoing the expansive authority the military is trying to reclaim. The military law revisions that Yunus was protesting would allow active soldiers to hold more civilian government posts, dragging Indonesia back toward the "dual function" era of the Suharto dictatorship.
Activists, journalists, and academics are facing increased pressure. Disinformation campaigns target critics online, while physical violence waits for them in the streets. When the state responds to an acid attack on a prominent critic with a slap on the wrist, it sends a clear, chilling message to the entire civil society. Speak up, and you're on your own.
If you are tracking human rights and political stability in Southeast Asia, you need to look past the headlines of these convictions. Don't look at the fact that four men are going to jail. Look at how easily the system protected the rest of the chain.
To support real accountability, international observers and domestic advocacy groups must continue demanding a reform of the Military Tribunal Law (UU Peradilan Militer). Until soldiers who commit crimes against civilians are tried by civilian judges, true justice in Indonesia remains a mirage. Keep pressure on local civil society organizations like KontraS as they navigate the appeals process and fight the broader legislative changes taking hold in Jakarta.
