GOWA — The Narcotics Investigation Unit of Gowa Police, South Sulawesi, arrested two siblings identified as AL (24) and AP (29) suspected of distributing methamphetamine via Instagram. Officers confiscated approximately 105 grams of methamphetamine alongside packaging equipment. This case demonstrates the core principles of #ReserseBekerja: an arrest marks only the beginning, while case strength depends on admissible and verified evidence.
From Drop Systems to Sequential Arrests
Head of Gowa Police Narcotics Unit Police Commissioner Ismail Phali Kansar explained that the operation originated from public intelligence regarding methamphetamine transactions utilizing drop systems (sistem tempel). Ismail delivered the statement at the Gowa Police Headquarters on Monday (12/10/2026).
Police arrested AL on Thursday night (9/10/2026) on Abdul Muthalib Daeng Narang Street, Pacci’nongang Village, Somba Opu District. Officers inspected a black plastic bag placed by the roadside, recovering several small packages of methamphetamine inside.
Investigators then expanded the inquiry to the suspect’s residence, arresting AP, AL’s older brother. According to Ismail, the two performed distinct operational roles as cross-regency distributor and courier. Ismail also noted that both obtained methamphetamine from a supplier before packaging and offering it through an Instagram account.
Digital Traces as Admissible Evidence
Ismail revealed that both suspects utilized an Instagram account to market the narcotics and allegedly leveraged electronic banking services for financial transactions. These operational details align the Gowa case directly with current criminal procedure standards.
Law No. 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), effective since January 2, 2026, explicitly places electronic evidence and physical items under valid legal proof pursuant to Article 235 paragraph (1). Legal documentation notes that the 2025 Code positions electronic evidence on equal footing with conventional physical proof.
Article 235 paragraph (4) grants judges authority to evaluate authentication and procedural legality in evidence acquisition. Consequently, investigators must ensure account history, communication logs, and banking records are legally obtained and verifiable during trial proceedings.
Procedural Standards Ensuring Evidentiary Strength
The updated procedural framework incorporates exclusionary rule principles. Article 163 paragraph (3) letter d dictates that physical evidence derived from illegal searches or seizures cannot be admitted as valid proof. This rule applies equally to case expansions conducted at suspect residences.
Judicial analysis highlights that converting seized items into admitted evidence demands strict chain of custody protocols. In the Gowa case, this standard encompasses documenting methamphetamine packages from roadside retrieval through formal weighing and laboratory testing.
Article 237 paragraph (1) of Law 20/2025 maintains the unus testis nullus testis principle, dictating that a single witness testimony remains insufficient to establish guilt. National Police Regulation No. 6 of 2019 on Criminal Investigation, through Article 34, enables investigators to integrate forensic technical support to reinforce case construction.
AL and AP retain suspect status, and judicial proceedings will ultimately evaluate the complete case construction. Statements indicating supply origins require verification through physical proof rather than assumptions. This embodies the purpose of #ReserseBekerja: legal certainty grows from systematically gathered evidence and accountable procedures.
Source: Gowa Police, Tribun News
