The National Police are ready to adjust the decision of the Constitutional Court on the ban on institutions to report slander

Jakarta – The Constitutional Court (MK) has changed a number of articles in the Information and Electronic Transaction Law (ITE Act) that decided to exclude government institutions, corporations, professions and positions from those who could report alleged slander. National Police confirmed that they were ready to adapt to the rubber articles corrected by the Constitutional Court. “Of course, national police will adjust or adjust the decision of the Constitutional Court,” Karopenmas Public Relations Division of the National Police, Brigadier General Trunoyudo on Wednesday (4/30/2025) told reporters. Trunoyudo believes the correction carried out by the Constitutional Court is aimed at protecting and serving the community. Browse to continue the content “is a rule applicable to providing protection and services to the community,” he explained. The ruling of the previous Constitutional Court granted the Constitutional Court the lawsuit number 105/Puu-XXII/2024 by a resident named Daniel Frits Maurits Tangkilisan. In his petitum, Daniel sued section 27A of the ITE Act, section 45 paragraph (4) of the ITE Act, section 28 paragraph (2) of the ITE Act to section 45a paragraph (2) of the ITE Act. The applicant believes that the articles did not provide legal certainty related to the handling of ITS matters, especially not slander. He also asked the MK to change the articles. The latest, the Constitutional Court has granted part of Daniel’s lawsuit related to Article 27A, section 45 paragraph (4), Article 28 paragraph (2) and section 45a paragraph (2). The following is the content of the article sued by Daniel: Article 27A: Everyone deliberately attacks the honor or good name of another person by accusing a thing, with the intention that it is commonly known in the form of electronic information and/ or electronic documents performed by an electronic system. Article 28: (2) all deliberately and without the right to distribute and/or transfer electronic information and/or electronic documents, or to influence others, or a sense of hatred or hostility of certain individuals and/or groups based on race, nationality, ethnicity, skin color, religion, gender, gender, mental disability, or physical weed in form 45: (4) of electronic Electronic system is performed, as referred to in Article 27A, is sentenced to a maximum imprisonment of 2 years and/or a maximum fine of RP. 400,000,000 Section 45a: (2) Any person who intentionally and without the right to distribute and/or transfer electronic information and/or electronic documents, and/or certain community groups based on race, nationality, ethnicity, skin color, religion, faith, gender, mental disability, or disability of Frsik as referred to Article 28 (2) (2) Prison (2) Prison punishment with a maximum imprisonment and a maximum period of a maximum period (2) imprisonment (2) imprisonment referred to with a maximum imprisonment and/or a maximum period referred to (or RP 1.000.000,000 along with the ruling read by the Constitutional Court today: 1. of 2024 regarding the second amendment of the Act Number 11 of 2008 regarding ITS which is contrary to the Constitution and does not have a case ‘in section 27A and section 45 as it was not interpreted (4) of the Act Number 1 of 2024 regarding the second amendment of the Act number 11 of 2008 regarding ITS in contravention of the Constitution of 1945 and does not have a legitimate “A deeds that are the honor or good name of a person. Electronic information contains an interpretation actions/distribution of hatred based on certain identities that are performed intentionally and publicly, which poses a real risk of discrimination, hostility or violence. Recommend that this decision be loaded into the Government Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia, as it would be6. Reject the request of the requester to other than and the rest. In its consideration, the Constitutional Court said that there must be a clear restriction associated with criminals. The Constitutional Court said it was important, so that law enforcement was objectively executed. “These norms have the potential to be used to take care of the freedom of expression that is not inclined (neutral), even expressions that are not intended to cause hatred, if the result of hatred or hostility indirectly arises, by the response of third parties. The legislation is used only. In addition, the Constitutional Court also granted the case case number 115/Puu-XXII/2024 by Jovi Andrea Bachtiar. In his lawsuit, Jovi asked the Constitutional Court to change a number of articles, namely section 310 of the Criminal Code, section 45 paragraph (7) of the ITE Act, section 45 paragraph (2) Letter A of the ITS Act, section 27 paragraph (1) of the IDS Act, section 45 paragraph (1) of the ITS Act, of the paragraph (3) of the Act. Jovi feels harmed by the articles of the ITE Act he sued. He felt that he was criminalizing because of the existence of the section in the ITE Act. The following is the content of the article that has been sued: Article 28: (3) All deliberately distributes electronic information and/or electronic documents he knows he contains false notices that cause riots in the community. Section 45A: (3) Each person who deliberately distributes electronic information and/or electronic documents he knows contains a HOAX notification that causes riots in the community, as referred to in section 28 paragraph (3), sentenced for a maximum of 6 years and/or a maximum fine of RP 1,000.000.000.000.000,000 in the Constitutional Court. Section 45a paragraph (3) of the Act Number 1 of 2024 regarding the second amendment of the Act number 11 of 2008 regarding ITS is contrary to the Constitution of 1945 and does not have a legal conditions for binding power, as long as it is not interpreted ‘riots are conditions that interfere with public order in the physical space, not in the digital/cyber. ‘In the public interest was carried out’ in section 45 paragraph (2) Letter A of the Act 1/2024 and the expression ‘violation of decency’ in section 27 paragraph (1) and section 45 paragraph (1) of Act 1/2024 cannot be accepted4. Recommend that this decision be loaded into the Government Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia, as it would. Reject the request of the requester to other than and the rest. In consideration, the Constitutional Court said that the formation of the Act actually gave limits through the exposition of Article 28 paragraph (3), namely the riots concerned are the conditions that upset public order in the physical space. The Constitutional Court said the restrictions in the article were important, so that law enforcement was clearly executed. “It is so intended that the application of Article 28 paragraph (3) of the Act 1/2024, which is a substantial offense that emphasizes the consequences or riots committed by the offenders of criminal acts, complies with the principles of Lex Scripta, Lex Certa and Lex Stricta,” said Mk. (Ond/Deck) HOEGENG Awards 2025 Read the inspiring story of the exemplary police candidate here