Publication Search

Regulatory overlap between the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, the Pornography Law, and the Sexual Violence Crimes Law in the handling of online gender-based violence (KBGO) in Indonesia creates a conflict of norms that results in double victimization. This normative legal study aims to identify the concrete forms of victim sacrifice resulting from overlapping regulations and to critique the inability of conflict-resolution mechanisms to address these conflicts through the principle of lex specialis systematica from a substantive justice perspective. The findings reveal four forms of victim sacrifice: victim criminalization, the length of the judicial process, inconsistencies in court rulings, and the failure to fulfill the right to restitution and the right to be forgotten. This study also concludes that the lex specialis systematis principle is inadequate because its dogmatic approach disregards the interests of victims, requires time and expertise that ordinary victims lack, and is not consistently applied in courts. This study recommends a paradigm shift from a dogmatic approach to a victim-centered approach.

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

Consumer criticism on social media is a common form of expression used to convey dissatisfaction with products or services. However, such criticism often generates controversy, especially when it is perceived to harm the reputation of a company. Although the right to freedom of expression is guaranteed by the Consumer Protection Law, in practice, this guarantee frequently conflicts with the defamation provisions outlined in the Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE) Law. The case of "Om Polos Banget" serves as a concrete example where consumer criticism led to legal charges due to allegations of defamation. This study aims to analyze the boundaries of consumer freedom of expression on social media within the context of Indonesian legal regulations and to identify the elements of defamation that may ensnare consumers. The research utilizes a normative juridical method, focusing on the analysis of relevant laws and regulations concerning freedom of expression and defamation. The results of the study indicate that while consumers have the right to criticize, there are legal boundaries that must be observed to prevent the criticism from resulting in legal action. Therefore, clearer policies are needed to ensure a fair balance between consumer freedom of expression and corporate reputation protection, as well as the importance of consumers maintaining ethical conduct when expressing criticism on social media.

This study discusses a legal analysis of the differences between criticism and defamation in Indonesian law, especially in the Criminal Code (KUHP) and Law Number 1 of 2024 concerning the Second Amendment to Law Number 11 of 2008 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions (UU ITE). The research method used is normative legal with a regulatory and contextual approach. The results of the study show that the Criminal Code and the ITE Law both provide protection for individual honor, but differ in the scope of application. The Criminal Code focuses more on conventional interactions, while the ITE Law regulates the electronic realm. Although it aims to protect the name well, the provisions in the ITE Law are considered to have weaknesses due to the potential for multiple interpretations that can threaten freedom of expression. Therefore, a proportional legal interpretation is needed to maintain a balance between protection of personal honor and respect for freedom.  

Max Havelaar's book (1860) is a novel by Multatuli, a Dutch writer whose real name is Eduard Douwes Dekker. The book written by Multatuli contains criticism of the Dutch colonial government's policy of forced planting and exploitation that afflicted the people of the Dutch East Indies (the name of Indonesia at that time). This research aims to find out how the book describes the social criticism directed at the Dutch colonial government over the forced planting policy during the colonial period. The method used is descriptive analytical with literature study techniques. The object of research is the book Max Havelaar by Multatuli. The results of the analysis show that the social criticism conveyed by Multatuli in Max Havelaar's novel aims to open the awareness of the Dutch colonial government and local nobles about the unfair and unequal government system so as to cause suffering for the indigenous people. This research has the potential to be a reference.