D

espite initial zest from lawmakers to have the alcoholic beverages prohibition bill approved in July, the House of Representatives continues to face indefinite delay as disagreements among parties have arisen.

At first, the lawmakers seemed impassioned, holding two to three meetings a week with the hope that they would be able to pass the bill into law during the July 28 plenary session. However, they will have to push back their plans because discussions are now progressing at a snail’s pace.

There are seven main parts of the bill to be discussed, namely title, classification of alcoholic beverages, prohibition, control and supervision, public participation and criminal sanctions.

After several months of discussions, lawmakers have only agreed on the classification of alcoholic beverages, which are based on alcohol content level.

United Development Party (PPP) lawmaker Mohammad Arwani Thomafi, who heads the House’s special committee on the bill, said they had agreed to classify alcoholic beverages into four groups based on ethanol content.

Category A consists of beverages with an ethanol level of 0 to 5 percent, category B 5 to 20 percent, category C 20 to 55 percent and category D above 55 percent.

The classifications will be used to determine which beverage group will be prohibited for distribution and general sales — with several exceptions such as tourism and limited entertainment — and which group will be allowed for general sales with tight control and supervision.

The bill’s title has particularly created controversy among lawmakers. While most parties prefer changing the title to “Alcoholic Beverages Control and Supervision Law”, some insist on keeping it as “Alcoholic Beverages Prohibition Law”, in accordance with the House’s initial draft.

The Islamic PPP is among the parties that insist the bill remain the “Alcoholic Beverages Prohibition Law”.

Arwani argued the PPP did not want its constituents to even think of alcohol as an option for consumption, although the bill will not completely prohibit the distribution of alcoholic beverages.

“Of course, alcoholic beverages can still be used in religious rituals and for consumption by foreign tourists and diplomats. We also take stock of their position,” he said.

Unlike the PPP, Gerindra does not support the “Alcoholic Beverages Prohibition Law” title, claiming that it is not in accordance with the constitution.

Gerindra lawmaker Aryo Djojohadikusumo, a member of the committee, said it had not met eye to eye over the classification of alcohol and whether or not they included food-based alcoholic ingredients in the bill. With such heated debate, Gerindra expects to see delayed approval of the bill.

Golkar Party lawmaker Noor Achmad, another member of the committee, said the party endorsed “control and supervision” for the title of the bill.

Noor said the bill was important to monitor the distribution of alcoholic beverages and to implement harsh penalties for those who fail to follow the rules. However, he argued that the bill must not foster a negative image of the country and scare off businesses and tourists.