Indonesia's parliament approved a new criminal code on Tuesday that bans sex outside marriage with a punishment of up to one year in jail, despite worries the laws may scare away tourists from its tropical shores and harm investment.
The new code, which will apply to Indonesians and foreigners alike, also prohibits cohabitation between unmarried couples. It will also ban insulting the president or state institutions, spreading views counter to the state ideology and staging protests without notification.
The laws were passed with support from all political parties.
However, the code will not come into effect for three years to allow for implementing regulations to be drafted.
Currently, Indonesia bans adultery but not premarital sex.
Maulana Yusran, deputy chief of Indonesia's tourism industry board, said the new code was "totally counter-productive" at a time when the economy and tourism were starting to recover from the pandemic.
"We deeply regret the government have closed their eyes. We have already expressed our concern to the ministry of tourism about how harmful this law is," he said.
Foreign arrivals in the holiday destination of Bali are expected to reach pre-pandemic levels of six million by 2025, the tourism association has said previously, as the island recovers from the impacts of COVID-19.
Indonesia is also trying to attract more so-called "digital nomads" to its tropical shores by offering a more flexible visa.
Speaking at an investment summit, U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia Sung Kim said the news could result in less foreign investment, tourism and travel to the Southeast Asian nation.
"Criminalising the personal decisions of individuals would loom large within the decision matrix of many companies determining whether to invest in Indonesia," he said.
Albert Aries, a spokesperson for Indonesia's justice ministry, said the new laws regulating morality were limited by who could report them, such as a parent, spouse or child of suspected offenders.
"The aim is to protect the institution of marriage and Indonesian values, while at the same time being able to protect the privacy of the community and also negate the rights of the public or other third parties to report this matter or 'playing judge' on behalf of morality," he said.
These laws are part of a raft of legal changes that critics say undermine civil liberties in the world's third-largest democracy. Other laws include bans on black magic.
'A DEATH FOR INDONESIA'S DEMOCRACY'
Editorials in national newspapers decried the new laws, with the daily newspaper Koran Tempo saying the code has "authoritarian" tones, while the Jakarta Post said it had "grave concerns" about their application.
Decades in the making, legislators hailed the passage of the criminal code as a much-needed overhaul of a colonial vestige.
"The old code belongs to Dutch heritage ... and is no longer relevant now," Bambang Wuryanto, head of the parliamentary commission in charge of revising the code told lawmakers.
Opponents of the bill have highlighted articles they say will curb free speech and represent a "huge setback" in ensuring the retention of democratic freedoms after the fall of authoritarian leader Suharto in 1998.
"This is not only a setback but a death for Indonesia's democracy," said Citra Referandum, a lawyer from Indonesia’s Legal Aid Institute. "The process has not been democratic at all."
Responding to the criticism, Indonesia's Law and Human Rights Minister Yasonna Laoly told parliament: "It's not easy for a multicultural and multi-ethnic country to make a criminal code that can accommodate all interests."
Legal experts say that an article in the code on customary law could reinforce discriminatory and sharia-inspired bylaws at a local level, and pose a particular threat to LGBT people.
"Regulations that are not in accordance with human rights principles will occur in conservative areas," said Bivitri Susanti, from the Indonesia Jentera School of Law, referring to existing bylaws in some regions that impose curfews on women, or target what are described as "deviant" sexualities.
The new laws will also include more lenient sentences for those charged with corruption.
The morality charges have been partially watered down from an earlier version of the bill so that they can only be reported by limited parties, such as a spouse, parent or child.
The government had planned to pass a revision of the country's colonial-era criminal code in 2019 but nationwide protests halted its passage.
Lawmakers have since diluted down some of the provisions with President Joko Widodo urging parliament to pass the bill this year before the country's political climate heats up ahead of the presidential elections scheduled for early 2024.
The public response to the new code has been muted so far, with only small protests held in the capital on Monday on Tuesday.
ZIA YUSUF, chairman of the Reform UK party, resigned on Thursday.
Reform UK, led by Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage, won five parliamentary seats in last July’s national election and had a strong showing in last month’s local elections.
The party is currently leading national opinion polls, ahead of prime minister Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.
“I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office,” Yusuf said, without giving further details about his decision to step down.
Internal divisions within Reform UK have surfaced publicly in the past. In March, the party referred one of its lawmakers, Rupert Lowe, to police over allegations including threats of physical violence against Yusuf. Prosecutors later decided not to bring charges against Lowe, who was suspended by the party.
Earlier on Thursday, Yusuf criticised Reform MP Sarah Pochin’s question to Starmer in parliament about whether the government would consider banning the burqa, calling it “dumb”.
Yusuf, who is not an MP, became chairman of the party last year.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.
Border Security Force (BSF) personnel patrol along the borderline fence at the India-Bangladesh border in Golakganj, Dhubri district in India's Assam state on May 26, 2025.
BANGLADESH on Wednesday said Indian authorities have pushed more than 1,270 people across the border over the past month. The group includes mostly Bangladeshis, along with Indian citizens and Rohingya refugees.
Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) officials said, “Between May 7 and June 3, Indian authorities pushed in 1,272 individuals, including a few Indian citizens and Rohingya, through 19 bordering districts.” They added, “Only yesterday, they pushed 50 individuals.”
Relations between the two neighbours have become tense since a mass uprising led to the fall of the previous Bangladeshi government last year. India surrounds Bangladesh on three sides.
India’s government has described undocumented immigrants as “Muslim infiltrators”, accusing them of being a security threat. It has not commented on the recent cases of people being sent back across the border.
Jahidul Molla, a 21-year-old Bangladeshi, said he was among those sent back. He said he had lived in India’s Gujarat state since the age of 14. “They picked us up from home and put us on a plane,” Molla told AFP. He said that after spending two weeks in a camp, he was taken onboard a ship with more than 50 others, almost all men.
“For the next three days, they kept beating us, and we were starving,” he said, claiming that they were later dropped overboard in the Sundarbans mangrove swamps along the India-Bangladesh border. “They dropped us... the coast guard rescued us and handed us over to the police.”
AFP said it could not independently verify his account.
India shares a long and porous border with Bangladesh, which is Muslim-majority. The Rohingya, a mostly Muslim minority group, have faced persecution in Myanmar for decades, including a major military crackdown in 2017. Over a million fled to Bangladesh, while others went to India.
The BGB official said “some of the Rohingya” being pushed back were registered with the UN refugee agency in India.
Md Touhid Hossain, head of the foreign ministry in Bangladesh's caretaker government, said Dhaka was “putting all our efforts” into resolving the issue through dialogue.
Indian media have reported that since a four-day conflict with Pakistan last month, authorities have pushed back more than 2,000 alleged illegal Bangladeshi immigrants.
In February, India’s interior minister Amit Shah said, “The issue of illegal intruders is also related to national security, and it should be dealt with strictly,” adding, “they should be identified and deported.”
(With inputs from AFP)
Keep ReadingShow less
Mahindananda Aluthgamage (centre) and Anil Fernando at Colombo court on Thursday (29)
A SRI LANKAN court last Thursday (29) sentenced two former ministers from the government of deposed president Gotabaya Rajapaksa to decades in prison in a landmark corruption case.
Ex-sports minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage and former trade minister Anil Fernando were found guilty by the Colombo high court of misappropriating 53 million rupees (£131,121) of state funds.
The pair were also fined £1,481 for using government money to donate board games – including 14,000 carrom boards and 11,000 draughts sets – in an attempt to boost the failed 2015 re-election bid of Gotabaya’s elder brother, Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Aluthgamage was sentenced to 20 years in jail. Fernando was sentenced to 25 years.
Aluthgamage is now the most senior member of a Rajapaksa-led cabinet to be successfully prosecuted for corruption.
The cases against both men were initiated six years ago, when the Rajapaksa brothers were out of power, but the case had been making slow headway until a new government took office last year.
Aluthgamage also faces a separate investigation into allegations that he authorised in 2022 a payment of $6.09 million (£4.5m) to a Chinese supplier for a fertilizer shipment that was never delivered. He caused a stir in 2020 when he accused Sri Lanka’s national cricket team of rigging the 2011 World Cup final in favour of India, triggering a probe that ultimately failed to substantiate his claims.
Aluthgamage, who served as sports minister from 2010 to 2015, said in June 2020 that he had “not wanted to disclose” the alleged match-fixing plot at the time.
“In 2011, we were supposed to win, but we sold the match. I feel I can talk about it now. I am not implicating players, but certain sections were involved,” he said.
Keep ReadingShow less
Scottish Labour candidate for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election Davy Russell arrives at a polling station to cast his vote on June 05, 2025 in Quarter, Scotland. (Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)
VOTERS are casting ballots across Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse in Scotland to choose a new MSP following the death of Christina McKelvie.
The by-election follows the death in March of the SNP government minister, who passed away aged 57 after battling secondary breast cancer. McKelvie had served as drugs and alcohol policy minister and held the constituency since its creation in 2011.
Ten candidates are competing for the seat, with results expected in the early hours of Friday (6) after polls close at 10pm on Thursday (5). The contest represents the first Scottish Parliament by-election since 2019, offering parties a crucial test of public opinion less than a year before the next Holyrood elections in May 2026.
The late MSP had won the seat comfortably in 2021 with a majority of 4,582 over Labour, making it a key battleground for the main parties. McKelvie first entered Parliament in 2007, representing the Central Scotland region before moving to Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse when boundary changes created the constituency.
The full list of candidates standing includes Katy Loudon for the SNP, Davy Russell for Scottish Labour, and Richard Nelson for the Scottish Conservatives. Other contenders are Aisha Mir (Scottish Liberal Democrats), Ann McGuinness (Scottish Green Party), Ross Lambie (Reform UK), Janice MacKay (UKIP), Collette Bradley (Scottish Socialist Party), Andy Brady (Scottish Family Party), and Marc Wilkinson as an independent.
Voters do not need identification to cast their ballots in this first-past-the-post election, where the candidate with the most votes wins. Those who requested postal votes but haven't sent them can still hand them in at polling stations before the 10pm deadline.
The contest comes at a significant time for Scottish politics, with all parties keen to build momentum ahead of next year's crucial Holyrood elections. The result will provide the first major electoral test since the general election and could offer insights into shifting voter allegiances in Scotland.
South Lanarkshire council is overseeing the election, with counting taking place at their Hamilton headquarters once polls close. The winner will serve as MSP for less than a year before facing voters again in the scheduled May 2026 Scottish Parliament elections.
Broadcasting restrictions prevent media outlets from reporting on campaigning or election issues while polls remain open. However, comprehensive coverage of the count and result will begin once voting ends at 10pm, reports said.
Keep ReadingShow less
Reform UK chairman Zia Yusuf. (Photo: Getty Images)
A PUBLIC row has erupted within Reform UK after one of their newly-elected MPs called for Britain to ban the burqa, with the party's own chairman branding the move "dumb".
Sarah Pochin, Reform's MP for Runcorn and Helsby, used her first appearance at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday (4) to ask Sir Keir Starmer whether he would follow European neighbours in banning the full-body covering worn by some Muslim women.
"Given the Prime Minister's desire to strengthen strategic alignment with our European neighbours, will he, in the interests of public safety, follow the lead of France, Denmark, Belgium and others and ban the burqa?" the former Tory councillor asked.
Her question prompted audible disquiet in the Commons, with cries of "shame" from fellow MPs. The prime minister declined to engage with the proposal, telling Pochin: "I am not going to follow her down that line."
However, the controversy deepened when Reform UK's chairman Zia Yusuf publicly distanced himself from the question on social media. "I do think it's dumb for a party to ask the prime minister if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do," he wrote on X.
Yusuf said he had "no idea" that Pochin would raise the issue and confirmed it was not party policy. "Had no idea about the question nor that it wasn't policy. Busy with other stuff," he added.
The split became more apparent when other Reform figures offered conflicting views. Lee Anderson, the party's whip, supported the ban on social media, writing: "Ban the burqa? Yes we should. No one should be allowed to hide their identity in public."
Sarah Pochin (Photo: UK Parliament)
Party leader Nigel Farage later told GB News that he believed "face coverings in public don't make sense and I think we deserve a debate about that, of which I see the burqa being part."
The debate sparked heated discussion on LBC Radio, where journalist Khadija Khan supported the ban, describing the burqa as coming with a "misogynistic ideology" that "denigrates women". She called it a security and gender equality concern, criticising the prime minister's "dismissive" response as "staggering".
However, Muslim Yemeni activist Lila Tamea strongly opposed the proposal, telling LBC that "forcing people to uncover something they don't wish to uncover is outright totalitarian". She warned it was a "dangerous move" and a "slippery slope", arguing there was "deep misunderstanding" over the meaning of the veil.
Several European countries have implemented similar bans. France introduced its prohibition in 2010 under then-president Nicolas Sarkozy, with fines of 150 euros (£126) for wearing face coverings in public spaces. Belgium followed a year later, while Denmark, Austria and Switzerland have since adopted comparable laws.
Pochin later defended her question, saying it was something "a number of people had raised" with her since her election last month.