PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 28, 2025SIGn Jurnal Hukum3 citationsOpen Access

Juridical Implications of Constitutional Court Decision Number 105/PUU-XXII/2024 Regarding Freedom of Expression in the Digital Space

View Full Paper
HCHery Chariansyah

Key Points

  • The Constitutional Court decision fundamentally alters defamation laws, promoting individual honor protection.
  • This ruling enhances legal safeguards for public criticism, fostering democratic engagement among citizens.
  • Normative legal research highlighted the decision's alignment with constitutional norms and international standards.
  • Challenges remain in implementing the decision, particularly regarding institutional reputation protection and law enforcement cultures.

Abstract

Constitutional Court Decision Number 105/PUU-XXII/2024 emerges as a crucial judicial intervention amid an Indonesian digital legal landscape characterized by the widespread criminalization of freedom of expression through vaguely worded articles in Law Number 11 of 2008 and its amendments. This research aims to comprehensively analyze the juridical implications of this decision, evaluate its consistency with constitutional norms and international human rights standards, and map its implementation challenges and prospects for future legal reform. Utilizing a normative legal research method that integrates statute, case, and comparative approaches, this study deeply dissects the legal reasoning (ratio decidendi) of the Constitutional Court and its impact on the legal system. The findings indicate that this decision fundamentally transforms the crime of defamation into an absolute complaint-based offense that purely protects individual honor. It significantly strengthens legal protection for public criticism and the democratic oversight function of citizens. It was also found that the decision is fully aligned with the constitutional guarantees in the 1945 Constitution and consistent with the principles of necessity and proportionality within the ICCPR. It is concluded that although the ruling represents a monumental advancement, its implementation faces serious challenges. These challenges include a legal vacuum concerning the protection of institutional reputation and the urgent need for a cultural shift within law enforcement agencies, thereby necessitating that this decision be leveraged as momentum for a broader digital law reform agenda.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hery Chariansyah (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d90bc641e1c178a14f6f62https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i1.498
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1TANGGUNG JAWAB KONSTITUSIONAL PEMERINTAH DALAM MENJAMIN HAK KONSTITUSIONAL ATAS INFORMASI DI ERA DIGITAL2025 · 1 citations
  2. 2PREMAN POLITIK DAN PASAR: ANCAMAN KEAMANAN TERHADAP IKLIM INVESTASI INDONESIA2025 · 1 citations
  3. 3Integration of Anti-SLAPP in the Reform of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code in an Effort to Protect Human Rights2025 · 6 citations
  4. 4The Independence and Accountability of the Constitutional Court in the Constitutional System in Indonesia2023 · 15 citations
  5. 5Potensi Pelanggaran Hak Kebebasan Berpendapat terhadap Delik Penghinaan Pemerintah dalam RKUHP2022 · 2 citations