Previous 11 / 20 Next

. " . ..f .-. otimi lrmrmo surmTITo dtin oa.Ic!Ii a.O"IF nola"tqm P®ngtiwctatin dan PomorilcBatin torhnt taLngun Pornxpang darl lucir Hogorl, tonuditi: •thl Almm IS]IA}]DAR nola.}a.won ponorlfroonn dan Elm. Poxpa,ng yong data.ng d^rl 1vmr tu P®eturat alngaporo Air tono8 (8q.166) ng wutta borlmlit 8awo nn¢®ng tlpo ^8 dng ronngGa Saga.81 dl Oonvovor Ncmor 1 qD' ]pdacAnga.n dan ootolah wcaltaL to?q®bu. "niingg`i lq,1u noniju koruang&n upt and F alLl tryw yQltu ]® FT.J&$ 1a,1u sa,kal totQp €ozidAdra haudi&n lac]1uap dttrl I.ua,ngaLz} ton '-:-,''-iJi±? ut. S®1an|utny& oohal ANITA IstIANI)AR ae Oz.aAlcm tct`RI urAm ytLng q®aang horjrilci 1ntu tolaQr (jtllur H1`|ou) da,n aalcBl tol run t®rch]era lrmRI urAla agivr nolotnl{1mn rtya leoda,l" XoDln X-Rtiy, la.Iu tordooarln morilztiaen X-Ray oonout{\rQ ltu oalcol nora torha,clap tag tt`ngQn ycing aibawE` oloh to] cl t.Orao but fromuaiun aalcB1 ^NITA I8RA}DAR r`ornfu.I J.`C)lnn- nya sraltu 8tilcol REHDRI 8UHART]:TO untult ` Zna-9aJ" trolihat bB811 1t`yar Morfltor ">Bin X-Ray €ult n®ytLIElnlfan bahwa tordapat 9oai`aLtu g*mn ald&1ou tn8 tnngon t;orDobut, de onot¢J. akoi- lan ltoh eordaltwtL MERRI UT^MI, topnya tobaldn aaLri dlming too topo®but doll dfLk tTaj`ar a,tou tltlQl{ nomnl .----- ~--- Bahw. 1tonudlan tordaltwa boo zlgivnnyo, albawaL to ruangan Penorlkeoa.n, w& 8otolch dlporihin dllnt&hul tor.rmmn .i. ' '. ' aent'}[.H PA®por Ho.X-857276 ti'argAmgar ta-tor(lal€ UTAMI orroolc', mnddl.firii torhatlap tordtLlrm REml uunq: 1ch dl}& lmlnn/`p#orlhoann rang loblh mondala]R ankal.. -.I: `',:.,,,'. ^NITA 19

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

MERRI UTAMI binti SISWANDI

CASE BRIEF

Jurisdiction

Indonesia

Nationalities

Indonesian

Case Title: MERRI UTAMI binti SISWANDI

Age at Offence: 28

Age Group at Offence: Adult (18 to 59)

Gender: Female

Religious Group at Offence: Other

Jurisdiction - Geolocation

Latitude: -6.293782809685137

Longitude: 106.84001863002779

Jurisdiction - Geolocation (linked CASE BRIEF): Indonesia

Contributing TRP Partner

Institute for Criminal Justice and Reform (Indonesia)

Latest Country's Death Penalty Status

Retentionist

Case Current Status: Ongoing: Resentence

Year when sentenced to Death Row: 2000s: 2002

Method of Execution: Firing/Shooting: Squad

Rights Allegedly Violated

Fair Trial and Due Process: Excessive and disproportionate punishment
Fair Trial and Due Process: Fair investigation & fair disclosure
Torture: Torture/Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CIDT)

Nature of Offences for Death Penalty

Drug Crime

Case Background (300 words max): The defendant, Merri Utami binti Siswandi, was arrested on October 31, 2001, at Soekarno-Hatta International Airport, Terminal D, upon her return from Nepal via Singapore. During an X-ray inspection of her handbag at customs, officers discovered anomalies in the bag’s lining. Upon further inspection, they found two brown paper packages concealed in the bag, containing a total of 1.10 kilograms of heroin. Merri had traveled to Nepal at the invitation of a man she identified as "JERRY", later known to be a foreign national (allegedly Canadian or African), with whom she had a romantic relationship. She claimed to have stayed with him in Nepal until he returned to Indonesia, leaving her behind and later instructing her—via phone—to accept a bag from acquaintances (MUHAMMAD and BADRU) and bring it back to Indonesia. Merri stated she was unaware of the heroin hidden in the bag and believed she was simply helping a friend by delivering a sample product. She was charged with importing and transporting Class I narcotics (heroin) under Article 82(1)(a) of Law No. 22 of 1997 on Narcotics, facing severe penalties due to the quantity involved and the cross-border nature of the offense.

Defence Arguments (200 words max.): At the cassation level, the defendant’s legal counsel argued that the petitioner for cassation was in fact a victim exploited by an international drug trafficking network. Throughout the examination of the case, there was no evidence presented to support the claim that the petitioner had the intent to import Category I narcotics. The petitioner merely carried a bag given to her by an individual named Badru, without knowing that it contained Category I narcotics in the form of heroin.

Subsequently, at the judicial review (peninjauan kembali) stage, the legal counsel argued that the death penalty is inconsistent with the purpose of punishment, as punishment should not serve as an act of revenge but rather as a means of rehabilitation. The goal is that, upon release from prison, the convicted individual becomes a reformed person who is aware of their past mistakes and ready to return to the right path.

Judgement with Headnotes (200 words max): The court found the defendant, Merri Utami, guilty of importing Category I narcotics (heroin), in violation of Article 82(1)(a) of Law No. 22 of 1997 on Narcotics. Despite her claim of being unaware of the contents of the bag she carried, the court held that her actions constituted intentional importation, as she brought a package into Indonesia from abroad without verifying its contents and without a clear explanation for her travel purpose.

The court concluded that her involvement met the elements of the offense under the law and therefore sentenced her to the death penalty, considering the quantity of narcotics involved (1.1 kg of heroin) and the seriousness of the crime.

Legal Representation Received

Trial: Private
Appeal: Private
Pre-trial: Unknown
Second Appeal: Unknown

Legislation Related to the Offence(s): Law Number 22 of 1997 concerning Narcotics

Case Brief Entry Status: Entry in Progress

Language of Case Materials

Bahasa Indonesia

Primary Documents

First Instance Judgement - Merri Utami
Indonesian
Download View
Appeal Judgment - Merri Utami
Indonesian
Download View
Case Review Judgement - Merri Utami
Indonesian
Download View
Cassation Judgement - Merri Utami
Indonesian
Download View

Death Penalty Defence - Asia

Select target paragraph3

MERRI UTAMI binti SISWANDI

Primary Documents

Notifications