Constitutional Court rejects test of material of Article 256 of the Criminal Code regarding notification of demonstration

Constitutional Court Building (Diah Ayu/VOI)

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the request for a test of the Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana or Criminal Code (KUHP) which questioned Article 256 regarding the necessity of notification if you want to hold a parade, rally, or demonstration.

The Constitutional Court considered that there was no constitutional issue in the article. The court also stated that the arguments for the application submitted by 13 students of the Faculty of Law at the Open University were not justified according to the law.

"Rejecting the applicants' request for all of them," said Chief Justice Suhartoyo reading the verdict on the application number 271/PUU-XXIII/2025 in the Plenary Session Room, Constitutional Court, quoted by Antara Jakarta, Monday, March 2.

Constitutional Justice Ridwan Mansyur explained that Article 256 of Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code does not regulate the issue of the right to express opinions in public and does not regulate criminal threats for those who use the right to express opinions in public.

The article only regulates criminal sanctions for the delivery of public opinions through marches, rallies, or demonstrations that disrupt public interests, cause panic, or chaos that are carried out without prior notification to the authorities, in this case the National Police.

This means, said Ridwan, if the right to express opinions in public has been notified to the authorities, the perpetrator cannot be charged with the norm of Article 256 of the Criminal Code if the parade, demonstration, or demonstration results in disruption of public interests, causing disorder, or chaos.

"In fact, normatively, if the activity of delivering opinions in public is not reported to the authorities and does not cause disruption of public interests, causes confusion, or chaos in society, then the perpetrators of the activity in question cannot be threatened with criminal penalties with the norm of Article 256 of Law 1/2023," he explained.

The Constitutional Court emphasized that the norm of Article 256 of the Criminal Code must be seen as cumulative. Because, as a material offense, the criminal threat against processions, rallies, or demonstrations occurs when the elements of disturbing public interests, arising from mischief, or chaos in society have been met.

Thus, a new criminal threat can be imposed if the person in charge, leader, or participant of a parade, rally, or demonstration does not inform the authorities in advance and then causes a disturbance of public order, disorder, and chaos.

"However, on the contrary, if there is no or no notification from the person in charge, leader, or participant of the parade, rally, or demonstration, but it does not disrupt public order, then the person cannot be charged with a criminal penalty," said Ridwan.

In this application, 13 students of the Open University FH tested Article 256 of the Criminal Code because they considered that the applicability of the norm of the article had the potential to create excessive restrictions on freedom of expression.

According to the applicants, the tested article norm places freedom of opinion in a vulnerable position because parades, rallies, or demonstrations have the potential to be considered a crime.

The applicants, among others, are Tommy Juliandi, Ika Aniayati, Siti Fatimah, Ali Fahmi, Narendra A. Reza, Khaerul Imam Azam, Shidqi Ilham Zhafiri, Bagus Adiputro Putra Pratama, Septian Abdiansyah, Sadira Fahmi, Shafira Avriski, Fahri Heriansyah, and Attaubah.