Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) secretary general Hasto Kristiyanto’s bribery conviction last Friday is a case in point. He was sentenced to three and a half years of jail for helping fellow party member Harun Masiku, still at large, bribe a General Elections Commission (KPU) official for a vacant seat in the House of Representatives in 2019.

The verdict came just a week after the same Jakarta Corruption Court convicted former trade minister Thomas Trikasih Lembong of enriching other parties through abuse of power in a sugar import policy implemented 10 years prior.

We are not questioning the validity of the court rulings as politicians in this country are prone to acts of corruption anyway, evident in the dozens of lawmakers, regional heads and ministers who have been imprisoned for committing graft. But in the cases of Hasto and Thomas, the rule by law, rather than the rule of law, defines the motive behind their prosecution. Had they not constantly criticized or challenged the power establishment, the enforcers of the law might not have acted against them.

There are examples of politicians who escaped justice despite the glaring evidence of their roles in high-profile graft cases, simply because they show unwavering loyalty to the ruler. This pattern of discriminatory enforcement of the law undermines public trust in the justice system, prompting many to try and take the law into their own hands.

Hasto's case revolves around his alleged complicity in a S$57,350 (Rp 731.3 million) bribe for KPU commissioner Wahyu Setiawan in 2019 to allow Harun to replace elected House of Representatives member Nazarudin Kiemas, who died before his inauguration in October 2019. Hasto was also charged with obstruction of justice, in his alleged assistance of Harun in his  escape from justice, but the court cleared him of the crime due to a lack of evidence.

Four other suspects in the case, including Wahyu, had been convicted and served their jail terms when the KPK named Hasto a suspect last December. The timing of the investigation into Hasto raised many eyebrows as it happened after he persistently verbally attacked then outgoing president Joko “Jokowi” Widodo on various matters, especially his alleged maneuvering to help Prabowo Subianto and his running mate Gibran Rakabuming Raka, Jokowi’s eldest son, win the 2024 election.

As a PDI-P member, Jokowi was supposed to support the party’s presidential choice of Ganjar Pranowo and his running mate Mahfud MD.

Like Hasto, Thomas was not on Jokowi’s side in the 2024 race. Thomas joined the campaign team for government critic Anies Baswedan, who partnered National Awakening Party (PKB) chairman Muhaimin Iskandar.

It is difficult to deny that the belated prosecutions and trials of Hasto and Thomas were politically motivated in such a way that legal systems have been co-opted and transformed into instruments of political power. These “legitimate” measures have also been pursued to silence dissent or neutralize opposition.   

Instead of serving as a neutral arbiter, the legal system becomes a partisan tool, blurring the lines between legitimate law enforcement and politically motivated persecution. Such practices fundamentally betray the spirit of justice, transforming the courtroom from a forum for fairness into an arena for political retribution.

This perversion of justice, often seen in the targeting of "political enemies", poses an existential danger to the very democratic principles it is meant to uphold. The broader consequences for democracy are dire. A system where law can be weaponized fosters an environment of instability and injustice.

If this phenomenon persists, this nation will gradually shift away from democratic governance toward a more autocratic state, where legal rights are selectively applied and justice is a privilege.