I have read the copy. And yes, I’m all for it.
It’s elaborate, comprehensive, and I just freaking love that it exist in my lifetime.

I understand how all the discourse is about the phrase “tanpa persetujuan korban” which then some translated it as “kalau dengan persetujuan korban berarti negara membolehkan dong.

Contoh di Pasal 5 ayat (2) huruf l:

l. menyentuh, mengusap, meraba, memegang, memeluk, mencium dan/atau menggosokkan bagian tubuhnya pada tubuh Korban tanpa persetujuan Korban;

But, like, come on, does anyone realize that sexual acts between consenting adults in which neither party is married to another person is not illegal here?

And this Permendikbudristek 30 is NOT to legalize that. No!

Orang-orang harus membedakan antara yang haram secara hukum agama dengan yang ilegal secara hukum negara. Seks di luar nikah haram, tapi di sini tidak ilegal (dengan beberapa pengecualian), sebagaimana makan daging babi dan minum alkohol diharamkan di agama Islam, tetapi di hukum Indonesia tidak ilegal dan/ atau diregulasi.

Sehingga, Permendikbudristek 30 ini semata-mata meneruskan stance pemerintah yang sampai saat ini nggak ngurusin selangkangan warga negaranya, unless it’s already legally belong to someone else through marriages, or that the subjects are underage, or other conditions within the scope of Pasal 5 ayat (3).

Urgensi peraturan ini adalah untuk menjawab maraknya kasus Warga Kampus yang melakukan kekerasan seksual dan banyaknya Korban yang tidak tau harus melapor ke mana karena tidak ada standarisasi pengaduan, perlindungan, dan pendampingan bagi korban kekerasan seksual di lingkungan perguruan tinggi.


(and if you don’t think that it is, please tell me who hurt you because I wanna know what kind of monster that could make you think that way)

Kewajiban pembentukan Satuan Tugas Pencegahan dan Penanganan Kekerasan Seksual juga harusnya tidak dinilai sebagai “menambah beban baru bagi kampus maupun sivitas perguruan tinggi.”

(looking at you, Bu Sakinah Aljufri dari Komisi X DPR-RI – PKS).

Karena apa ngga ‘sakit’ namanya kalau di atas kertas Tri Dharma Perguruan Tinggi jalan tapi di bawah meja banyak tangan dosen-dosen gerayangin paha mahasiswa-mahasiswinya? So are we expecting to just sweep under the rugs the trauma the victims had because of sexual harassment they experienced in their campus yard, the place that’s supposed to be safe place for nurturing talents and inspiring brilliant minds?

But —and this is a big BUT— even as someone who’s on the #WeAgree side, I still find possibilities of loopholes within this Permendikbudristek 30. And it also has to do with the “consent” concept.

So, I acknowledge that consent is given and can also be taken back. For example, even during consensually-agreed sexual acts, one partner may ask to stop, and they must stop; because the consent is taken back at that point.

And one of the loopholes is, what if during the full course of acts, everyone is consenting. But let’s say few days after that, one party regrets it, and proceeds to make a formal report stating it as non-consensual. As this a very private matter, the other party/ies may have no evidence to counter that report. And it could be messy trying to prove or disprove the allegations. Though when it comes to relasi kuasa, this PPKS fortunately already covers it, still, cases like this could be as problematic as our pasal karet on UU ITE.

In the end, I understand that no regulation could be truly perfect and accommodating for everyone. But aside of the possible flaws, I will say Permendikbudristek 30 is something I agree with.


Download salinan lengkap Permendikbudristek 30 di sini.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *