Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul reading out the Court’s opinion at the ruling hearing for the material judicial review of the Press Law, Thursday (3/30/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.
JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the entire material judicial review petition of Article 15 paragraph (2) letter d of Law No. 40 of 1999 on the Press, filed by Moch. Ojat Sudrajat, Thursday, March 30, 2023 at the ruling hearing for Decision No. 13/PUU-XXI/2023 in the plenary courtroom.
“[The Court] rejected the Petitioner’s petition in its entirety,” said Chief Justice Anwar Usman reading out the verdict alongside the other eight constitutional justices.
Press Council’s Function
In its legal considerations read out by Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul, it asserted that understanding Article 15 paragraph (2) letter d of the Press Law comprehensively required understanding of other norms, such as Article 15 paragraph (2) letter e, which stipulates that the Press Council’s function is to develop communication between the press, the public, and the government.
Substantially, those provisions have accommodated the Petitioner’s request and his question of the constitutionality of the Council’s function of providing considerations for and facilitating public complaints of cases related to press reporting. This function is part of the Council’s effort to promote public participation, which is guaranteed by Article 17 of the Press Law, where it states that the community can monitor and report analysis on legal and ethical violations as well as misreporting by the press. The community can even form media watch organizations.
Justice Manahan said that the public’s right of press monitoring is part of the control function through activities that can guarantee the right to obtain information. The Press Law has guaranteed that the press would not suffer from censorship, bans, or dissolution. Therefore, in order to implement this control, the public can make recommendations to the Press Council to maintain and improve the quality of the national press. Such control is important in developing balance with the national press’ responsibility of reporting events and opinions to the public within society’s religious and moral norms and under the presumption of innocence.
Whereby the state is based on Pancasila values, the respect for those values are important boundaries in reporting so that the civilization is guaranteed. Therefore, in relation to Article 5 paragraph (1) of the Press Law, it is further explained that the national press, in broadcasting information, does not judge or make presumptions of a person’s guilt, especially in cases that are still in the judicial process, and can accommodate the interests of all parties involved in reporting.
It is thus important to emphasize the Press Council’s function as per 15 paragraph (2) letter d of the Press Law, in that for the sake of accountability, journalists have the right to not disclose their informants.
Therefore, in giving its considerations on public complaints on reporting, the Press Council’s function guarantees the right to answer and to correct. These rights are part of public control guaranteed by the Press Law. Therefore, it is the press’ obligation to correct inaccurate information, data, facts, opinions, or images it has reported.
Norm Implementation
In relation to the Petitioner’s argument against the phrase “cases related to press reporting” in Article 15 paragraph (2) letter f of the Press Law, which he believed the Press Council had used to avoid having to resolve press reporting disputes since the media organization broadcasting the contended reporting is not listed with the Council, this in violation of Article 1 point 5 of the Press Council Regulation No. 01/Peraturan-DP/VII/2017 on the Procedure of Complaints to the Press Council.
The Petitioner also asserted that it had led to legal discrimination since any statement or reporting on social media or online media by non-journalists and those outside of press companies that can be categorized as a hoax or libel can be reported to the police using the EIT Law.
The Court was of the opinion that these things are a matter of norm implementation, not of constitutionality, thus did not fall under its jurisdiction. Moreover, the Petitioner had been erroneous in elaborating the argument against the constitutionality of Article 15 paragraph (2) letter f of the Press Law, since he had understood it only partially and not comprehensively in relation to other norms. Any press reporting offense has been regulated in Chapter VIII on Criminal Provisions, i.e. in Article 18 of the Press Law. in addition, even if the company is not listed with the Press Council, the norm is inseparable from Article 1 point 2 of the Press Law (“A press company shall be an Indonesian legal entity operating in press enterprise that includes printing media company, electronic media company, and news agency, and also other media company that specializes in operating, broadcasting or disseminate information”).
Therefore, what a press company is has been detailed in the General Provisions of the Press Law. Moreover, it is the Press Council’s responsibility to list press companies.
The Court asserted that Article 15 paragraph (2) letter f of the Press Law did not contradict the right to recognition, guarantees, protection, fair legal certainty, and equality before the law and government and did not cause legal discrimination as guaranteed in the 1945 Constitution. Thus, the Petitioner’s petition was not legally founded in its entirety.
Also read:
Petitioner Slandered by Press, Challenges Press Law
Petitioner Revises Petition Challenging Press Law
At the preliminary hearing on Monday, February 13, the Petitioner asserted his constitutional rights to recognition, guarantee, protection, fair legal certainty, and equality before the law on “cases related to press reporting” by journalists and/or press companies that are not listed with the Press Council; “cases related to press reporting” in the form of hoaxes, slander, insults, and/or libel that disparages the dignity and honor of individuals, legal entities, and public bodies; and/or news articles that invoke hate or enmity among individuals and/or certain groups based on ethnicity, religion, race, and group (SARA).
“The Petitioner experienced an issue due to news reporting that slandered the Petitioner’s name, hoaxes and false news. However, the resolution must go through the Press Council, which only (resolve) news reporting by (media) in the Press Council’s list, while those outside of the Press Council was outside of its jurisdiction,” he said.
Author : Utami Argawati
Editor : Nur R.
PR : Muhammad Halim
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.
Thursday, March 30, 2023 | 13:52 WIB 156