Legal experts and activists voiced support for a court ruling voiding legal provisions that made insulting the government a criminal offence, but said there were still doubts about the move’s effectiveness.
The provisions were part of Indonesia’s updated penal code, which took effect in January.
At the time, their broad definitions drew condemnation from democracy activists concerned they might harm civil liberties and free speech, and put government critics at risk of arrest.
Under the law, a six-month jail term could be imposed on anyone organising a rally, parade or demonstration on public streets without notifying the police.
Indonesia is the world’s third-largest democracy, but concerns have grown in recent years about the erosion of democratic values under President Prabowo Subianto, who is battling to restore the confidence of the general public, the business community and investors spooked by the economic impacts of his ambitious, populist programmes.
On Friday, Indonesia’s Constitutional Court, whose decisions are final and binding, struck down articles that criminalised insulting the government and disseminating such insults, which were punishable by up to three years in prison.
Experts and activists praised the ruling, but warned yesterday that the country has previously used other means to criminalise critics.
Legal scholar Asfinawati said the ruling was good news, while Made Supriatma, a visiting fellow at the Iseas-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, said it offers some protection for government critics, though it does not apply to provisions that criminalise insults against individuals.
Indonesia’s law minister did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The law had defined insults as acts that degraded or damaged the honour of the government, including slander and defamation.
It defined the government as including the president, the vice president and ministers.
The nine-member panel of judges issued the ruling after granting a judicial review filed by several law students.
The court agreed with the students’ reasoning that the provisions could criminalise criticism and create a “chilling effect” among people wishing to express their thoughts.
“All institutions, including state institutions, are legal subjects that do not possess feelings, whether of being praised, criticised or insulted,” the court said in the ruling published on its website on Friday.
Usman Hamid, the director for Amnesty International in Indonesia, said the court ruling was a positive step but noted that most recent cases used defamation or incitement provisions included in another law.
“The ruling won’t matter much,” he said. — Reuters
