Table 2

Main argument types of supporting and opposing the PP 109/2012 amendment in news articles (2016–2023)

Supporting the amendment
Argument typesExample of citations
Smoking trend and initiation‘.at present, Indonesia is already in a state of emergency regarding smoking children. This is marked by the continuously increasing prevalence of smoking children from year to year. Instead of decreasing, the prevalence of smoking in children has actually risen by 1.9% during the period from 2013 to 2018.’—Indonesian Child Protection Commission (CSO)
Health and safety implications‘This is the part that we observe, and if we don't do something, it will worsen our condition. Not to mention that stunting is also influenced by parents who smoke.’—Tobacco Control National Committee (CSO)
Science-based‘He explained that scientific facts from Indonesia’s Drug and Food Control Agency have found that electronic cigarettes contain harmful chemical compounds to health, including: nicotine, propylene glycol, flavouring, metals…’—National Agency of Drug and Food Control (Government)
Protecting the population‘This is where the importance of the state steps in to protect public health by formulating strong and decisive policies to safeguard the well-being of the community.’—Lentera Anak Foundation (CSO)
Opposing the amendment
Argument typesExample of citations
Tobacco farmers’ or workers’ welfare‘The revision of PP 109/2012 is intended to jeopardise the livelihoods of 2.5 million tobacco farmers and 1.5 million clove farmers who depend on the tobacco ecosystem.’—Indonesian Tobacco Farmers Association (Industry front group)
Impact on the industry‘They also request that the government stop the revision process of PP 109/2012, as it will pose a significant threat to the survival of the tobacco-related industry ecosystem.’—Association of Tobacco Communities in Indonesia (Industry front group)
Current regulation is sufficient‘It must be considered whether the current revision of PP 109/2012 is urgent or not. In my opinion, the timing is not right. It’s better to focus on empowering the community,’—Legal expert (scholar/expert)