Publication Search

This study analyzes the juridical transformation of freedom of expression after the enactment of Law Number 1 of 2024 as the second revision of the Electronic Information and Transaction Law (ITE Law). The main focus of the research is the reconstruction of defamation offenses from Article 27 paragraph (3) to Article 27A, as well as its implications for constitutional guarantees in Article 28E paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. The method used is normative juridical with legislative, conceptual, and case approaches. The case study of the case of Haris Azhar and Fatia Maulidiyanti is used as a limited empirical analysis. The results of the study show that even though Law No. 1 of 2024 has narrowed insults to absolute complaints, the formulation of norms that are still multi-interpreted, especially in the phrase "attacking honor", still has the potential to threaten freedom of expression and create a chilling effect in the digital space. In addition, the lack of clear parameters regarding public criticism and personal insults creates legal uncertainty. Therefore, consistent interpretation guidelines and harmonization with human rights principles are needed so that the protection of citizens' constitutional rights is guaranteed.

This study examines the implementation of religious freedom in Indonesia, focusing on the case of the sealing of the POUK Tesalonika House of Prayer in Teluknaga, Tangerang Regency, in April 2026. This incident reflects the tension between administrative regulations, specifically the Building Permit, and the constitutional right to freedom of religion as guaranteed in Article 28E and Article 29(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. This study employs a normative legal method with legislative,conceptual, and case-based approaches. The analysis reveals that the sealing action fails to meet the principle of proportionality in administrative law, and results in legal discrimination that contradicts the principle of equality before the law and the spirit of Pancasila. These findings affirm that the right to worship is a non-derogable right that cannot be diminished by technical permitting regulations. Therefore, the state must prioritize a facilitative and protective approach in regulating places of worship, to guarantee freedom of religion and uphold Indonesia’s integrity as a democratic and tolerant rule of law state.

Artikel ini membahas filsafat eksistensialisme dalam konteks dunia modern, dengan fokus pada tantangan yang dihadapi oleh individu dalam pencarian makna hidup di tengah kemajuan teknologi, perubahan sosial, dan kompleksitas kehidupan kontemporer. Filsafat eksistensialisme, yang berakar pada pemikiran tokoh seperti Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche, dan Jean-Paul Sartre, menekankan pentingnya kebebasan, tanggung jawab pribadi, dan pencarian makna yang autentik. Dalam artikel ini, eksistensialisme dianalisis dalam kaitannya dengan dinamika sosial dan budaya modern, serta relevansinya dalam membantu individu mengatasi masalah seperti kecemasan eksistensial, alienasi, dan pencarian identitas dalam masyarakat yang cepat berubah. Diharapkan bahwa pemahaman yang lebih dalam tentang eksistensialisme dapat memberikan wawasan tentang cara-cara individu dapat menemukan makna dalam kehidupan mereka di dunia yang serba cepat dan serba digital.

Artikel ini membahas pemikiran filsafat politik dalam menghadapi krisis global dari dua perspektif utama: konservatif dan liberal. Dalam konteks krisis global yang mencakup perubahan iklim, ketidaksetaraan ekonomi, dan konflik geopolitik, pandangan filsafat politik menawarkan solusi yang beragam. Perspektif konservatif menekankan pada pentingnya stabilitas sosial, nilai tradisional, dan peran negara yang kuat dalam menjaga tatanan sosial. Sebaliknya, perspektif liberal menekankan pada kebebasan individu, hak asasi manusia, dan pentingnya kerjasama internasional untuk mengatasi tantangan global. Artikel ini mengkaji kedua perspektif tersebut, mengidentifikasi kekuatan dan kelemahannya, serta memberikan refleksi tentang bagaimana keduanya dapat memberikan wawasan dalam merespons tantangan politik kontemporer.

Amidst the rapid development of digital technology today, copyright plays a complex role as an instrument for protecting works and at the same time as a potential inhibitor of innovation. Protection of exclusive rights granted by the copyright protection system aims to provide economic incentives or financial benefits to the creator. However, in practice, it often creates limitations on creative freedom, especially in the context of derivative works, remixes, parodies, and other creative uses that are developing rapidly in the digital realm. This study aims to examine how the copyright legal system, both normatively and implementatively, affects the scope of movement of creative actors in producing innovation. Through a normative legal approach with a review of international and national literature, this study found that copyright protection is too strict and has the effect of freezing reactivity, especially if it is not balanced with clear fair use provisions. However, on the other hand, loose regulations will also risk ignoring the moral and economic rights of the original creator. Thus, a balance is needed between the protection of individual rights and the public interest within the framework of a legal system that is adaptive and inclusive of digital culture. The study recommends strengthening open licensing frameworks such as Creative Commons, as well as updating national copyright policies to ensure that legal systems do not hinder, but rather encourage, the growth of innovation and creative expression in the digital age.

Freedom of expression is one of the fundamental rights that serves as the primary foundation of modern democratic systems. This right is not only recognized in international legal instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Article 19, but is also explicitly guaranteed in the constitutions of democratic states, including Article 28E paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. This study aims to analyze the position of freedom of expression as an essential pillar of democracy within the human rights framework, examine constitutional protection mechanisms and applicable limitations, and evaluate its implementation in the Indonesian legal system. The research method employed is normative legal research with a statute approach, conceptual approach, and comparative approach. The findings indicate that freedom of expression is not merely an individual right, but a collective instrument that enables meaningful public participation in democratic processes. Restrictions on this freedom must fulfill the requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality as established by the Siracusa Principles. In Indonesia, the primary challenge lies in regulatory plurality that potentially creates overlapping provisions and the risk of criminalizing legitimate expression, particularly through the implementation of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE).

Freedom of expression is a constitutional right of citizens guaranteed within Indonesia’s constitutional system as part of the principles of the rule of law and democracy. However, in practice, this freedom often faces various forms of restrictions that tend to be repressive, including through the criminalization of expression and the practice of political terror. This article aims to critically examine how political terror is used as an instrument of power that results in restrictions on freedom of expression, as well as to assess its compatibility with the principles of constitutional law. This study employs a normative legal methodology using legislative, conceptual, and case-based approaches. The findings of the study indicate that the criminalization of expression whether through regulations open to multiple interpretations or the actions of law enforcement officials has the potential to create a chilling effect that hinders public participation in the democratic sphere. In this context, the politics of terror manifests not only in the form of overt repressive actions but also through legal constructs selectively employed to silence criticism of those in power. This situation highlights a tension between constitutional guarantees and prevailing state practices. Therefore, efforts are needed to reconstruct legal policies that ensure more substantial protection of freedom of expression, as well as to strengthen oversight mechanisms regarding the exercise of state authority so that they align with the principles of constitutional democracy and respect for human rights.

This study examines the dynamics of public criticism of Shin Tae-yong's dismissal by PSSI as a phenomenon of digital communication that shows the tension between freedom of expression and the legal limits of hate speech. The background of this research stems from the intensity of netizens' reactions, which developed into collective moral pressure and had the potential to enter the realm of insults and hostility, as reflected in various comments, news reports, and verbal disputes involving public figures. This study aims to analyze how criticism, media framing, and netizen responses interact with the regulations of the ITE Law, particularly Article 28 paragraph (2), which is often used in reporting hate speech. The methods used are a normative juridical approach and case studies with document analysis, news reports, and academic literature techniques to identify patterns of digital expression and their legal relevance. The results of the study show that public criticism of Shin Tae-yong not only reflects performance evaluation, but also contains emotional, social identity, and moral dimensions that are reinforced by media framing and digital culture. The discussion confirms that the shift from criticism to hate speech occurs when public expression is not managed ethically, while law enforcement on hate speech articles still faces interpretation problems. In conclusion, this verbal dispute reflects the complexity of Indonesia's digital democracy and the urgency of legal reform

The rapid expansion of digital media use has intensified the practice of cyberbullying as a form of non-physical violence that seriously affects victims’ mental health, dignity, and human rights. In Indonesia, cyberbullying is not specifically regulated and still relies on general provisions in the Law on Electronic Information and Transactions (EIT Law), which often lead to multiple interpretations, overcriminalization, and potential restrictions on freedom of expression. This article aims to analyze the urgency of establishing a specific criminal offense for cyberbullying within the framework of human rights protection and the principle of proportionality in limiting freedom of expression in the digital sphere. This study employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches to regulations in several countries. The findings indicate that the absence of specific norms on cyberbullying creates legal uncertainty and weakens victim protection while also opening opportunities for the misuse of legal provisions against legitimate expression. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate clear, proportional, and victim-oriented criminal regulations, supported by fair and transparent law enforcement mechanisms that are consistent with human rights principles in the digital era.