T

he Jakarta administration is determined to uphold a smoking ban in buildings, claiming that it will not go against a Constitutional Court ruling that requires building owners to provide smoking areas.

Mohammad Tauchid of the city’s Environment Management Board (BPLHD), said on Wednesday that he believed the court’s ruling would not affect the current enforcement of the indoor smoking ban.

“It’s true the ruling would mean that building owners should provide smoking areas, but these areas are not necessarily located inside the buildings,” Tauchid said.

It was possible for building owners to provide special smoking areas outside, he argued.

The BPLHD is currently still discussing the implication of the court ruling with the city Legal Bureau and the Health Agency. “We will maintain the policy that no smoking rooms should exist within buildings,” Tauchid said.

Earlier this month, the Constitutional Court finalized a judicial review of the 2009 Health Law regarding smoke-free zones, ordering all government and privately owned buildings to “isolate” smokers in special areas.

The plaintiff wanted the word “may” to be scrapped from a clause that reads “workplaces and public places may provide special areas for smoking”. The request for a review was filed by three smokers, Enryo Oktavian, Abhisam Demosa Makahekum and Irwan Sofyan.

The court granted the request.

The court ruled that the word “may” in the clause might lead to an absence of “smoking rooms” to accommodate the interests of smokers and those who wanted to avoid the threat secondhand smoke poses to their health.

The Jakarta administration earlier said it would annul its Gubernatorial Regulation No. 88/2010, which prohibits smokers lighting up indoors, including in smoking rooms, to comply with the court ruling.

The decree was an amendment to a 2005 bylaw on air pollution control, which stated that people were not allowed to smoke at all in five types of facilities, namely public transportation, healthcare buildings, schools, children’s areas and places of worship, but allowed smoking in designated rooms in other buildings.

Through the decree, the Jakarta administration extended the smoking ban in all spaces in public places and buildings after finding that smoking rooms in buildings did not stop smoke from infiltrating non-smoking areas.

BPLHD based the ban’s extension on laboratory tests that found non-smoking areas were contaminated by smoking rooms when they were available.

Separately, Azas Tigor Nainggolan, a lawyer representing pro-smoking ban Jakarta Residents Forum (Fakta), said that the city administration need not revise the 2010 decree.

“From what I understand, the Constitutional Court ruling gives the administration the right to use discretion. The city should continue with the smoking ban,” Azas said.

The activist said the city was on the right track in protecting non-smoking Jakarta.

Last year, Governor Fauzi Bowo pledged to make Jakarta a smoke-free city through more initiatives, including reducing the space allocated for cigarette advertisements across the capital.

The BPLHD had warned building managers to abide by the 2010 decree or face being publicly named as violators of decree. The agency could temporarily close buildings that continue to flout the regulation.