A

convicted pimp on Tuesday filed a judicial review at the Constitutional Court calling for an amendment to the Criminal Code that would allow his former clients and sex workers to be charged.

The pimp, Robby Abbas, asked the Constitutional Court to include clients of sex workers and sex workers themselves as parties liable to be charged for committing indecent acts '€” i.e. prostitution '€” under the Criminal Code.

Robby is challenging articles 296 and 506 of the Criminal Code, which are generally applied to charge pimps, arguing that the two articles violate the principles of equality before the law and legal certainty laid out in the Constitution. Robby said it was unfair that he had been the only party prosecuted in his recent case.

'€œThere are three parties involved in '€˜indecent acts'€™ '€” the one who looks [for the service], the one who provides and the woman or the celebrity herself,'€ lawyer Supriyadi Adi, representing Robby, told a Constitutional Court hearing on Tuesday.

'€œHowever, the articles in the Criminal Code were only applied to the plaintiff, and ignored the other two parties involved. The plaintiff received unfair treatment '€” after all, he only served as a go-between.'€

In his petition, Robby demanded that the court include those who intentionally committed '€œindecent acts'€ to earn money in return for their services in the existing provisions as parties liable to legal prosecution.

Article 296 of the Criminal Code stipulates that a person who facilitates indecent acts as a source of income or as a habit could face a maximum 16 months in prison, while Article 506 says that a person who takes advantage of indecent acts to earn money could face a maximum of one year in prison.

Late last month, a panel of judges at the South Jakarta District Court sentenced Robby, 30, to 16 months in prison after finding him guilty of violating Article 296 of the Criminal Code for providing his clients with women for sex. Many of the women involved were reportedly TV soap opera actresses and models.

The Criminal Code does not explicitly outlaw sex work, although prostitutes may be arrested for obscenity or for disturbing public order.

The public has long been divided over prostitution and related issues. Some, including a number of lawmakers, have called for a tougher stance on prostitution and the explicit criminalization of sex workers, while others have voiced concern that such provisions would entail discrimination against women and impinge on their freedom of association.

Since the enforcement of a 2005 ban on prostitution in Tangerang municipality, there have been a number of reports of women being arrested on their way home from work in the evening on suspicion of being prostitutes.

In the petition filed on Tuesday, Robby also argued that the two articles had created a legal vacuum as they did not cover other parties involved in indecent acts or prostitution, saying that the situation led to legal uncertainty for a number of local administrations, like those in Tangerang and Jakarta, which have imposed ordinances prohibiting prostitution.

In the petition, the plaintiff also laid claim to a legal standing on the basis that as a citizen his constitutional rights had been violated by the two articles.

Constitutional Court Justice Wahiduddin Adams hinted that the court would probably reject the petition. A draft to amend the Criminal Code, including the provisions related to prostitution, was still being discussed at the House of Representatives, Wahiduddin said.