A

fter nearly a year of heated courtroom debate over a judicial review petition that seeks to outlaw, premarital sex and homosexual sex, the Constitutional Court (MK) is scheduled to deliver a ruling on the matter on Thursday.

Filed by individuals from various backgrounds, some of whom are academics affiliated with the conservative Family Love Alliance (AILA), the petition seeks to alter related provisions in the Criminal Code (KUHP) to combat “free sex” in the country.

The petitioners argued that the articles, which only outlaw extramarital sex and same-sex relationships with a minor, should also be applicable to any type of consensual sex outside of marriage and same-sex relationships.

Their lawyer, Feizal Syahmenan, said the petition aimed at gradually changing all provisions in the KUHP, a legacy of the Dutch colonial era, on the grounds that they represent “Western values.”

“The articles were used as a way to enforce Dutch [colonial] values on our nation,” Feizal told The Jakarta Post on Wednesday, adding that they were not in line with the Pancasila principle of believing in a divine power.

The petitioners are using religion as a basis for their argument, claiming that premarital sex would turn Indonesia into an uncivilized nation.

The petition has drawn the attention of both human rights and conservative groups, who have filed third-party applications to challenge or support the cause. Both sides have presented experts on sociology, law, education, Islamic studies and human rights.

Among the groups that oppose the petition are the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR) and the state-backed National Commission on Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan), which said that around 2 million couples nationwide with unregistered marriages could be a target of criminalization should the court rule in the petitioners’ favor.

Followers of indigenous faiths could also face criminal charges, as they are frequently met with roadblocks when applying for marriage certificates.

“Over-criminalization would become a serious threat to Indonesia,” said the ICJR’s Erasmus Napitupulu.

The petitioners, meanwhile, have received support from the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) and the Association of Muslim Housewives (Persistri), two groups seen as representing the conservative community.

With the court slated to announce its verdict on Thursday, many are concerned that the petitioners’ religious arguments could appeal to some justices. Patrialis Akbar and Aswanto, for instance, have shown favor for the petitioners’ arguments in past hearings.

There is a wide perception that the court is leaning toward conservatism, as suggested by the rulings of several judicial reviews from the past.

Six years ago, in a ruling many said was based on fears of a public backlash, the court upheld the Blasphemy Law and rejected the arguments of those who argued it was frequently used by intolerant groups to oppress minorities.

Activists’ hopes now lie in justices Maria Farida Indrati, I Dewa Palguna and Saldi Isra, who are considered the most progressive among the nine justices.

In early February, the court wrapped up a series of hearings in the case, which started when Patrialis, known for his conservative statements, was still in office and before he was arrested for bribery in late January.