The Petitioner’s legal counsels at the panel petition revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 19 of 2016 on Electronic Information and Transactions (EIT), Wednesday (3/29/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The petition revision hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 11 of 2008 as amended by Law No. 19 of 2016 on Electronic Information and Transactions (EIT) took place on Wednesday, March 29, 2023 in the Constitutional Court’s (MK) plenary courtroom. The petition No. 25/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by private-sector employee Tedy Romansa.

At the second hearing, through legal counsel M. Yusuf Hasibuan, the Petitioner asserted that several revisions had been made, such as the legal standing. The Petitioner is an Indonesian citizen following Article 51 paragraph (1) letter a of the Constitutional Court Law whose constitutional rights and authority had been impaired by the a quo articles, which could potentially be used to criminalize him.

“They are catchall articles that have often been troubling for the general public and the Petitioner. They have also led to legal uncertainty both normatively and in implementation, so they threaten the Petitioner’s constitutional rights,” Hasibuan said before the panel chaired by Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat.

The Petitioner has also revised the background of the petition. He argued that the petition was not ne bis in idem with previous cases.

“This petition differs from [previously ruled cases] in terms of articles and touchstones, as explained before, so the Petitioner’s petition is not ne bis in idem, thus deserves examination, adjudication, and ruling by the Constitutional Court,” Hasibuan emphasized.

The Petitioner has also revised the petitum, now requesting that the Court declare Article 27 paragraph (3) of the EIT Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “by the Joint Decrees of the Minister of Communication and Informatics, Attorney General, and Police Chief No. 229 of 2021, No. 154 of 2021, and No. KB/2/VI/2021 on Guidelines on Certain Articles in Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions as amended by Law No. 19 of 2016 on the Amendment to Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions.

Also read: Accused of Defamation, Private-Sector Employee Challenges EIT Law

The Petitioner challenges Article 27 paragraph (3) and Article 45 paragraph (3) of the EIT Law. Article 27 paragraph (3) reads, “No Person shall intentionally and unauthorizedly distribute and/or transmit and/or cause to be accessible Electronic Information and/or Electronic Records with contents of affronts and/or defamation.” Article 45 paragraph (3) reads “Any Person who intentionally and unauthorizedly distributes and/or transmits and/or causes to be accessible Electronic Information and/or Electronic Records with contents of affronts or defamation as referred to in Article 27 section (3) shall be sentenced to imprisonment of at most 4 (four) years and/or a fine of at most Rp750,000,000 (seven hundred fifty million rupiah).”

He argued that the EIT Law had many catchall articles, which should be amended so they would not jeopardize justice and truth as referred to in the 1945 Constitution. The Petitioner feels he has not obtained guarantee and legal certainty due to the enactment of Article 27 paragraph (3) and Article 45 paragraph (3) of the EIT Law.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Raisa Ayudhita
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---