Ruling Hearing of the Decree in Case No. 161/PUU-XXIV/2026 concerning the Judicial Review of Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions, as amended by Law No. 19 of 2016 on Amendments to Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions, held on Monday (May 25, 2026). Photo: MKRI/Bay.

---

JAKARTA, MKRI – Chief Justice Suhartoyo, together with the eight other Constitutional Justices, pronounced a decree concerning the petition filed by Ferdian Yudhistira (Petitioner I), Nugraha Pamuja Sakti (Petitioner II), Ega Purnama (Petitioner III), Lintang Dwi Ramadhani (Petitioner IV), and Virana Marhaeni (Petitioner V). The pronouncement of Determination No. 161/PUU-XXIV/2026 was held at the Court on Monday (May 25, 2026).

The Petitioners had initially filed a judicial review of Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions, as amended by Law No. 19 of 2016 concerning Amendments to Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE Law). Subsequently, the Court noted that it had received the petition and that the Petitioners had orally submitted a request to withdraw the petition during the hearing.

The Judges’ Deliberation Meeting (RPH) held on May 12 and May 20, 2026, determined that the withdrawal of the petition was legally justified and that the Petitioners would not be permitted to refile the a quo petition. The RPH further instructed the Registrar of the Constitutional Court to record the withdrawal in the Electronic Register of Constitutional Cases (e-BRPK) and to return copies of the case documents to the Petitioners.

“Determines: to grant the Petitioners’ request to withdraw the petition,” Chief Justice Suhartoyo stated while reading Decree No. 161/PUU-XXIV/2026 from the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court’s First Building.

Also read:

Object Not Valid, Petition Against EIT Law Withdrawn

At the Preliminary Hearing held on Monday (May 18, 2026), the Petitioners, who are university students, challenged Article 27 paragraph (3) of the ITE Law, which provides:

“Any person who intentionally and unlawfully distributes, transmits, or makes accessible Electronic Information and/or Electronic Documents containing content that insults and/or defames another person.”

According to the Petitioners, Article 27 paragraph (3) of the ITE Law is contrary to Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28E paragraph (3), and Article 28F of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.

The Preliminary Hearing was presided over by Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih, accompanied by Constitutional Justice Ridwan Mansyur and Constitutional Justice Arsul Sani. However, before proceeding further with the examination of the case, Justice Enny reminded the Petitioners that the provision being challenged was no longer in force.

In response, Nugraha, acting on behalf of the Petitioners, stated that the Petitioners would withdraw their petition.

Author             : Sri Pujianti

Editor              : N. Rosi

PR                   : Raisa Ayuditha M.

Translator        : Nies Lindy

Explore Case No. 161/PUU-XXIIV/2026

Decision No. 161/PUU-XXIV/2026 (in Indonesian)

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 prevails.

---