Hate speech on social media against public figures is a phenomenon that is increasingly prevalent in the digital era. Such Speech not only affects the reputation of individuals but can also trigger wider social conflicts. In the context of Indonesian law, hate speech is regulated in several provisions, including the Criminal Code (KUHP) and the Electronic Information and Transaction Law (ITE Law). However, law enforcement against hate speech often faces obstacles in the evidentiary aspect, especially in distinguishing between freedom of speech and criminal acts. In this context, forensic linguistics plays a crucial role as a tool for legal evidence by analyzing the language used by the perpetrator. This research aims to explore how forensic linguistics can be utilized to identify the elements of hate speech, determine communicative intent, and distinguish between criticism, opinion, and speech that is insulting or defamatory. The approach used is a descriptive qualitative method with case studies examining several social media posts containing hate speech against public figures. The data were analyzed regarding the theories of pragmatics, critical discourse, and the principle of relevance in criminal law. The analysis shows that forensic linguistics plays a significant role in the legal process, from the investigation to the verdict. Pragmatic and semantic analysis can reveal the intention of the utterance and its social context, making it easier for law enforcement officials to assess whether a statement fulfils the elements of a criminal offense. Thus, collaboration between linguists and law enforcement officers is crucial in handling hate speech cases fairly and proportionally, ensuring that legal decisions are grounded in accurate linguistic analysis while protecting freedom of expression and preventing unjust criminalization.
Hermawan et al. (Wed,) studied this question.