A Juridical Analysis of the Rehabilitation of Narcotics Abuse Victims Under Law Number 35 of 2009 Concerning Narcotics
Keywords:
Rehabilitation, Narcotics Abuse, Law No. 35 of 2009.Abstract
Narcotics abuse constitutes a serious legal and social problem in Indonesia because it affects individual health, social relations, and law enforcement. Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics adopts a dual orientation by combining criminal-law enforcement with treatment and rehabilitation for narcotics addicts and victims of narcotics abuse. This study aims to analyze three juridical issues: the government's role and responsibility in providing rehabilitation facilities and programs; the legal measures required to strengthen the implementation of rehabilitation policy; and the legal, institutional, and social barriers encountered in its implementation. This research employs a normative juridical method using statutory and conceptual approaches. The analysis examines the relationship among Articles 54, 55, 103, and 127 of Law Number 35 of 2009, the implementing regulations, and relevant legal doctrines and literature. The results show that Article 54 establishes a substantive legal obligation for narcotics addicts and victims of narcotics abuse to undergo medical and social rehabilitation, while Article 103 gives judges authority to order treatment and/or rehabilitation for narcotics addicts in the circumstances provided by law. Article 55 regulates the mandatory-reporting mechanism through which addicts or their families report to designated health or rehabilitation institutions; therefore, self-initiated reporting should not be equated with a legally “voluntary” form of rehabilitation because the underlying rehabilitation and reporting framework is established by law. Article 127 further requires judicial consideration of the rehabilitation framework when dealing with narcotics abusers for personal use. The juridical analysis indicates that the principal problem is not the absence of a legal basis, but the gap between the mandatory normative framework and the institutional capacity required to realize it, including facility availability, competent personnel, financing, inter-agency coordination, stigma, and continuity of post-rehabilitation services. Accordingly, the required policy response is the harmonization and consistent application of rehabilitation norms, clearer referral and assessment mechanisms, strengthened institutional capacity, and integrated post-rehabilitation support. These conclusions are normative and do not constitute an empirical measurement of the effectiveness of rehabilitation services.
References
M. Chanif, “STRATEGI PEMERINTAH DALAM MENANGANI DAN MEREHABILITASI PENGEDAR NARKOTIKA DAN KORBAN DARI NARKOTIKA DI INDONESIA,” Jurnal Hukum Progresif, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 45–57, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.14710/jhp.11.1.45-57.
W. B. F. Pasaribu, K. Syafruddin, Suwarto, and A. Madiasa, “Rehabilitation System as Legal Protection Efforts for Victims of Narcotics Crime,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Law, Governance and Islamic Society (ICOLGIS 2019), Paris, France: Atlantis Press, 2020. doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.200306.223.
Antonius Aditya Pratama, “Kewajiban Rehabilitasi bagi Pecandu Narkotika berdasarkan Putusan Hakim,” JURNAL HUKUM, POLITIK DAN ILMU SOSIAL, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13–28, May 2023, doi: 10.55606/jhpis.v1i1.1705.
T. Riyadi, T. Y. Chandra, and S. T. Paparang, “EFEKTIVITAS PENERAPAN REHABILITASI TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA DI INDONESIA,” SINERGI : Jurnal Riset Ilmiah, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 3693–3704, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.62335/sinergi.v2i8.1638.
J. Utami, “Kebijakan Hukum Pidana terhadap Penyalahgunaan Narkotika Pasal 127 Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika,” Wajah Hukum, vol. 9, no. 2, p. 667, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.33087/wjh.v9i2.1853.
A. L. Meiranda and R. Ginting, “IMPLEMENTASI HAK REHABILITASI DALAM PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM BAGI PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA PENYALAHGUNAAN NARKOTIKA BAGI DIRI SENDIRI (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR: 653/PID.SUS/2018/PT.MKS),” Recidive : Jurnal Hukum Pidana dan Penanggulangan Kejahatan, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 53, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.20961/recidive.v10i1.58859.
B. T. Bawono, D. Wahyono, and A. W. Laksana, “IMPLEMENTATION OF REHABILITATION FOR DRUG ABUSES ACCORDING TO LAW NUMBER 35 OF 2009 CONCERNING NARCOTICS,” Jurnal Hukum, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 1, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.26532/jh.v38i1.20869.
D. Kristiani, “Konsep Pidana Rehabilitasi Berbasis Teori Keadilan Bermartabat bagi Pecandu dan Korban Penyalahgunaan Narkotika,” Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Pancasila dan Kewarganegaraan, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 395, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.17977/um019v7i2p395-404.
S. K. Bumi, S. Supolo, and B. Nugroho, “Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Korban Penyalahgunaan Narkotika,” AL-MANHAJ: Jurnal Hukum dan Pranata Sosial Islam, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 351–364, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.37680/almanhaj.v4i2.1860.
A. I. Hamzani, T. V. Widyastuti, N. Khasanah, and M. H. M. Rusli, “Legal Research Method: Theoretical and Implementative Review,” International Journal of Membrane Science and Technology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 3610–3619, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.15379/ijmst.v10i2.3191.
Muhammad Hairul and Desi Anisah, “Tinjauan Yuridis Pasal 54 UU Narkotika: Rehabilitasi Sebagai Solusi Bagi Pecandu dan Korban Penyalahgunaan Narkotika,” Amandemen: Jurnal Ilmu pertahanan, Politik dan Hukum Indonesia, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 58–72, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.62383/amandemen.v1i4.519.
E. Praditya, “Upaya Hukum Rehabilitasi terhadap Penyalahgunaan Narkotika menurut Undang-undang No 35 tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika,” KANGMAS: Karya Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 35–40, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.37010/kangmas.v6i2.2126.
Dila Puspita Dewi, “Peran Rumah Sakit Terhadap Pecandu Narkotika Dalam Rehabilitasi Medis,” JISPENDIORA Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Pendidikan Dan Humaniora, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 132–149, May 2023, doi: 10.56910/jispendiora.v1i1.572.
Antonius Aditya Pratama, “Kewajiban Rehabilitasi bagi Pecandu Narkotika berdasarkan Putusan Hakim,” JURNAL HUKUM, POLITIK DAN ILMU SOSIAL, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13–28, May 2023, doi: 10.55606/jhpis.v1i1.1705.
A. V. Putri and Yusep Mulyana, “MENGKAJI EFEKTIVITAS REHABILITASI MEDIS DAN SOSIAL DALAM PENANGGULANAGAN PENYALAHGUNAAN NARKOTIKA,” Journal of Innovation Research and Knowledge, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 5231–5244, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.53625/jirk.v5i4.11389.
Yuliana Yuli Wahyuningsih, Atik Winanti, Marina Ery Setyawati, Kayus Kayowuan Lewoleba, and Satino Satino, “Efektivitas Rehabilitasi sebagai Alternatif Hukuman bagi Pecandu Narkoba (Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika),” KREATIF: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Nusantara, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 106–119, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.55606/kreatif.v6i1.9589.
N. Nurlaila, K. Kristiawanto, and M. Ismed, “Implementasi Pembinaan Korban Penyalahgunaan Narkotika Melalui Rehabilitasi Pada Lembaga Pemasyarakatan,” JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–20, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.15408/jlr.v4i1.24812.
Yuliana Yuli Wahyuningsih, Atik Winanti, Marina Ery Setyawati, Kayus Kayowuan Lewoleba, and Satino Satino, “Efektivitas Rehabilitasi sebagai Alternatif Hukuman bagi Pecandu Narkoba (Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika),” KREATIF: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Nusantara, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 106–119, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.55606/kreatif.v6i1.9589.
J. Robekha, S. Prianggono, A. Mutiara, F. Ratna, and R. Yuwafi, “Analisis Kebijakan Hukum terhadap Strategi Rehabilitasi Pecandu Narkotika,” IBLAM LAW REVIEW, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 211–216, May 2024, doi: 10.52249/ilr.v4i2.520.
Y. Wang, Y. Li, Y. Chen, L. Jia, B. Zhang, and H. Tan, “Study on the Influencing Factors and Countermeasures of Drug Addicts’ Relapse,” International Journal of Education and Humanities, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 100–103, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.54097/pq2wkv79.
