Indonesia Passes Revisions to Internet Law Amid Criticism
After facing criticism from activists and opposition figures, Indonesia has implemented revisions to its internet law to address concerns about its use as a tool to suppress government dissent.
The recent amendment to the electronic information and transaction law (ITE) introduces stricter requirements for the defamation article, thereby raising the standard of proof necessary for prosecutions. Additionally, the maximum penalty for defamation has been reduced from four years to two, signifying a significant change in the legislation.
The amendment has taken immediate effect and aims to narrow the legal definition of defamation. According to Johanna Poerba, a researcher at the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, these changes mark a crucial step in protecting freedom of expression online.
The demand for a revision to the 2008 law has been ongoing, with activists arguing that its ambiguous and easily exploitab articles have posed a threat to freedom of speech in Indonesia, the world’s third-largest democracy. Notably, in 2019, opposition figure Ahmad Dhani was sentenced to one year in prison under the ITE law for referring to political rivals as ‘idiots’ in an online video.
Although the recent revision is a positive development, it has not been without criticism. Citra Referendum, a member of the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute (LBH), expressed concern that the law could still be misused by officials who feel offended, ultimately providing them with additional legal protection.
Furthermore, high-profile human rights activists Haris Azhar and Fatia Maulidiyanti are currently facing defamation charges under the law. They have been accused of defaming senior cabinet minister Luhut Pandjaitan after discussing a report on the alleged involvement of military figures in the mining industry in Papua province via a video.
In conclusion, the revisions to Indonesia’s internet law represent a step in the right direction, addressing long-standing concerns about freedom of expression and the prosecution of government opposition. The changes to the defamation article, in particular, signify a move towards balancing the protection of individuals’ reputations with the fundamental right to express dissent and criticism.
