TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Lawmakers at loggerheads over family resilience bill
Members of the House Legislation Body (Baleg) convened in a series of hearings on Monday and Tuesday to deliberate the bill, during which some party representatives criticized content they argued would overreach into people's private lives.
Change Size
Firefighters spray disinfectant at the House of Representatives complex in Senayan, Central Jakarta, on Aug. 9 in the lead up to the House’s plenary meeting to mark Independence Day. (JP/Dhoni Setiawan)
P
olitical party factions at the House of Representatives remain divided over the so-called family resilience bill, with those in opposition casting doubt over the bill's substance and proponents citing the urgency of drafting a specific law covering family-related issues.
Members of the House Legislation Body (Baleg) convened in a series of hearings on Monday and Tuesday to deliberate the bill, during which some party representatives criticized content they argued would overreach into people's private lives.
Golkar Party politician Nurul Arifin said there was no urgency to draft the bill as several prevailing laws touched on family-related issues that the bill aimed to cover, such as a 2009 law on population growth and family development as well as a 2019 law on marriage.
She further said that the draft of the bill had tried to cover too many issues, including on the private matters of individuals in the nation's heterogeneous society.
"The way I see it, this bill is too rigid as it tries to regulate things that are unnecessary and [could turn] the public into nosy busybodies," Nurul said during the hearing on Tuesday.
Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) lawmaker Putra Nababan agreed with Nurul, saying that the bill burrowed too far into people's private lives, which did not require the government's intervention.
Putra also raised concerns over Article 55 of the draft bill, which stipulates that the central government and regional administrations have the authority to monitor and access the personal information of families, saying that the provision was problematic.
