The public caning of an unmarried couple in Indonesia’s Aceh province after they were accused of kissing during a TikTok livestream has renewed international criticism of the region’s implementation of Islamic law, while exposing a more nuanced debate among local residents.
The man, 22, and woman, 25, each received 21 lashes with a rattan cane during a public punishment carried out on July 2 in Banda Aceh, the provincial capital. Footage of the caning quickly circulated on social media, showing the pair visibly in pain, with the woman breaking down in tears as the punishment continued.
Aceh is the only province in Indonesia that enforces sharia law under its Islamic Criminal Code, known as Qanun Jinayat. The province was granted special autonomy, including the right to implement Islamic law, as part of a 2005 peace agreement that ended decades of armed conflict between the Indonesian government and separatist rebels.
The latest case has drawn condemnation from international human rights organisations. Amnesty International described all forms of corporal punishment as constituting torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The organisation also expressed concern that Aceh’s authorities are increasingly monitoring online activity to identify alleged violations of sharia law.
The July punishment follows several other high-profile public canings in recent months. In May, authorities in Southeast Aceh collectively administered more than 200 lashes to 15 people for offences including adultery and gambling. Earlier this year, another couple each received 140 lashes after being convicted of sex outside marriage and alcohol consumption.
Despite international criticism, many residents in Aceh continue to support the practice, viewing it as an expression of the province’s religious values and special autonomous status.
Nurjani, a 62-year-old resident of Banda Aceh, said she believes the punishment reflects Islamic teachings and personal responsibility.
“If you do not do anything wrong, then there is nothing to fear,” she said. “I support caning because it is part of our religion.”
Muhammad Nasir, another resident, said sharia law formed part of Acehnese identity and was guaranteed under the province’s autonomy agreement.
“It was agreed that Aceh could enact sharia law as part of the peace deal, so it is our right,” he said. “Daily life in Aceh is closely connected with religion.”
Support for caning, however, is not unanimous. Some residents question whether it is appropriate for all offences, while others argue it damages Aceh’s international reputation whenever videos of public punishments spread online.
The Legal Aid Institute in Banda Aceh also expressed reservations, particularly over the use of caning in cases involving sexual violence.
Muhammad Qodrat, the institute’s operational head, said corporal punishment was too lenient for sexual offenders and did not adequately protect victims.
“Because caning sentences can be carried out very quickly, perpetrators often return to their communities almost immediately,” he said. “In some cases, they may encounter or even intimidate their victims again.”
He argued that imprisonment provides better protection for victims by ensuring physical separation between offenders and those they harmed.
Caning in Aceh is carried out using a thin rattan cane over clothing. Officials administering the punishment are prohibited from striking above shoulder height, and executioners wear hooded robes to conceal their identities.
While Aceh’s canings frequently attract global attention, corporal punishment remains legal in several other countries in the region. Malaysia prescribes judicial whipping for various criminal offences, while Singapore authorises caning for dozens of crimes and, in certain circumstances, as a disciplinary measure for school students.
The latest incident has once again highlighted the sharp divide between international human rights concerns and the views of many Acehnese residents, who continue to regard sharia-based punishments as part of the province’s religious, legal and cultural identity.
