Activists remain wary as court narrows presidential insult provisions
The Constitutional Court’s recent ruling that alleged insults against the president or vice president can only be prosecuted upon their complaint has not quieted fears for free speech amid growing intimidation of critics.
The Constitutional Court’s recent ruling limiting the prosecution of alleged insults against the president or vice president to their own complaints has not eased concerns about free speech amid increasing intimidation of critics. During a hearing on Wednesday, the nine-justice panel partially approved a petition challenging three articles of the new Criminal Code, which penalize offenses that may tarnish the honor or dignity of the president or vice president.
The 15-law students-led petition aimed to invalidate these provisions and clarify eligibility for filing complaints, arguing that legal uncertainty could stifle free expression. The Court recognized the ambiguity, ruling that insults against the president or vice president could only be prosecuted if the aggrieved party files a complaint.
It effectively prevents family members, supporters, and other third parties from filing such complaints on their behalf. Justice Guntur commented, "The decision is made so that there’s no room for other parties [...] to file a criminal proceeding based on their own judgment." Despite the ruling, the panel rejected the petitioners' request to nullify the three provisions, stating that defamation articles remained constitutional and could function as intended without violating free speech rights.
Written by urgent.news from The Jakarta Post's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.