Background:
Indonesia heavily relies on international donors to finance its harm reduction services. Domestic funds primarily cover the procurement of drugs, such as methadone, while international donors support peer outreach workers, syringe procurement, community strengthening, and other essential components. This reliance can pose a great threat as the international funding for harm reduction has been reduced since 2016 and might be even more stringent with several major donors, such as the United States and the Netherlands, cutting their international aid budgets.
Methods:
A comparative budget analysis was conducted to compare Indonesia’s national financial allocation for harm reduction services and drug-related law enforcement. Publicly available financial reports from relevant government institutions in 2023 were examined to highlight disparities in spending priorities.
Results:
The overall budget between harm reduction services and law enforcement is blatantly disproportionate. The Ministry of Health’s budget for drug rehabilitation services was 1,612,910 USD, but this encompasses all types of drug-related treatments, not just harm reduction. On the other hand, the National Police’s and National Narcotics Board’s budget for law enforcement of drug cases was approximately 57,938,980 USD, which is 35 times greater than the rehabilitation budget. Calculating the total number of recipients of these two measures, the budget spent for a person in rehabilitation is also less than the budget spent for a person processed in law enforcement. A patient spends around 768 USD while an offender costs around 1,038 USD.
Conclusion:
The great imbalance between harm reduction and law enforcement funding might result from the narrative of the war on drugs and unequal power between ministries. It is important to assess the value-for-money and long-term impact of these two approaches so that Indonesia can strengthen its public health effort measures.
Disclosure of Interest Statement:
There are no conflicts of interest in relation to this study. The research was conducted independently, and there was no external funding influence on the study. |