Challenges of Combating Transnational Drug Trafficking in Southeast Asia

Mary Jane Veloso, a Filipino national convicted of drug trafficking in Indonesia in 2010, was repatriated to the Philippines in December 2024. After fourteen years of incarceration and narrowly escaping death by firing squad, Veloso’s future hangs in the balance. As calls for clemency are being mounted on Philippine President Bongbong Marcos, Veloso is being detained at a correctional facility for women in the Manila capital region as she awaits the president’s decision. The episode underscores the need for regional-level initiatives to tackle the issue of transnational drug trafficking.

Governments across Southeast Asia have taken a tough stance against illegal drugs. Indonesia and the Philippines, particularly during the terms of Joko Widodo (Jokowi) and Rodrigo Duterte, employed severe measures against illicit drug trafficking. Indonesia metes out the death penalty as a deterrent for such crimes. Eighteen convicted offenders, most of whom were foreign nationals, were executed during Jokowi’s first two years in office. Duterte’s violent war on drugs, on the other hand, was responsible for more than 6,000 casualties in anti-drug police operations by the end of his term.

Against this backdrop, Veloso was caught in the crosshairs of a war waged between drug syndicates and law enforcement agencies. Indonesian authorities arrested Veloso in 2010 when heroin was discovered inside her suitcase upon her arrival at Yogyakarta airport. She was subsequently tried for drug trafficking. However, Veloso’s trial was fraught with irregularities. Court proceedings were conducted in Bahasa and translated into English, a language Veloso was not fully knowledgeable of. Veloso’s counsel was a court-appointed lawyer not of her choosing. Throughout, Veloso maintained her innocence. She claimed that a god-sister named “Christine” provided the suitcase where the heroin was found and used her as a drug mule.

In the end, Indonesian judicial authorities convicted Veloso and sentenced her to death. On the day of her execution, Veloso was granted a last-minute reprieve after the Philippine authorities informed the Indonesian government that Veloso’s alleged recruiter had surrendered. It took several years of negotiations between the Philippines and Indonesia before a repatriation agreement was finalised in December 2024.

Veloso’s case highlights the challenges of effectively addressing the transnational dimension of criminal law enforcement, especially concerning the illicit narcotics trade. There have been regional efforts to address cross-border drug criminality. ASEAN established its Narcotics Cooperation Center in 2014 and the Drug Monitoring Network in 2015 to coordinate the work of drug control agencies from member states. In 2016, ASEAN adopted a work plan that detailed the strategies and activities aimed at realising a “drug-free ASEAN.” This plan touched on matters of law enforcement, extra-regional cooperation, treatment and rehabilitation, and preventive education. In October 2024, ASEAN leaders issued a declaration to enhance and recalibrate concerted efforts, recognising that modern technology and digital connectivity have been increasingly exploited in the illegal drug trade.

Nonetheless, drug trafficking remains a serious problem in Southeast Asia. In the 2024 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) report, a record 169 tonnes of methamphetamine was seized in ASEAN in 2023. The report highlighted that the smuggling methods of organised crime groups have become more sophisticated; their operational reach has also expanded. UNODC noted that these criminal networks may have even penetrated the ranks of law enforcement agencies in the region. The most recent ASEAN Drug Monitoring Report found that in 2022 there were 595,687 drug offenders across the region, with 63,077 foreign nationals apprehended for drug-related crimes. Of that number, 97.9 per cent of them were ASEAN nationals who committed drug-related crimes in other ASEAN countries.

The mandating of cooperative measures could run into resistance from countries, especially when these are perceived as overt external interference in their domestic affairs.

Despite the magnitude of ASEAN’s illegal drug problem, there remain barriers to effective regional cooperation. A study identified that these barriers include conflicting legal systems, low levels of regional trust, information exchange limitations, and inadequate professional training and capacity-building. By default, countries tend to prioritise domestic over transnational crimes due to limited resources and capabilities. As such, cross-border crimes such as illegal drug trafficking are given less attention. The propensity to freeride on collective efforts could disincentivise countries from going full throttle against transnational criminality. Myanmar, Cambodia, and Laos, for instance, not only have weak law enforcement practices but are also said to have facilitated criminal operations in their backyards. As a result, these countries have become safe havens for criminal networks. The imbalance in the commitment of ASEAN countries derails a baseline and standardised approach towards combating transnational illegal drug trafficking. To compound matters, it may even force others to opt out of such collective initiatives.

Moreover, the territoriality principle in criminal law — that a state exercises absolute and exclusive jurisdiction over crimes committed within its territory — accords countries legitimate authority to prosecute and punish criminal offenders. The non-interference principle contained in the 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation discourages ASEAN member-states from meddling in the internal affairs of neighbouring countries as a way of respecting each country’s sovereignty and independence. These principles constitute obstacles to cultivating and sustaining cooperative efforts in transnational criminal law enforcement. The mandating of cooperative measures could run into resistance from countries, especially when these are perceived as overt external interference in their domestic affairs.

Responding to critics, for example, Jokowi justified Indonesia’s hardline approach against illegal drugs as a rightful exercise of the country’s sovereignty in implementing domestic anti-narcotics laws. In the same vein, the Philippines’ withdrawal from the International Criminal Court, a body critical of Duterte’s drug war, was justified as a necessary measure that upheld Philippine sovereignty.

While Veloso has returned to her home country, the issue of illegal drug trafficking persists. Veloso’s ordeal and that of countless others should compel all ASEAN countries to double down on their efforts against the illegal narcotics trade. The burden of combating transnational criminality is a shared responsibility which ASEAN countries must equally bear. The administrations of Bongbong Marcos of the Philippines and Prabowo Subianto of Indonesia should take a leaf from their predecessors’ miscalculations. The Philippines and Indonesia should reinforce bilateral ties in stamping out cross-border drug criminality. Both countries should utilise existing mechanisms, such as those contained in the Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters among ASEAN member-states, to facilitate information exchange and resource-sharing between their governments. These would pave the path for stronger regional collaboration capable of effectively tackling the challenges of cross-border drug trafficking.

2025/80