Serangan Bertubi Kebebasan Pers Di Indonesia

Photo Illustration By Andry Winarko

JAKARTA - Threats and attacks on Press Freedom seem to never stop, attacks continue to repeat in various forms. Press freedom, such as freedom of opinion and freedom of expression, is the basic right that is protected by the 1945 Constitution, especially Article 28 F. Law No. 40/1999 as a derivative of the Constitution has become the basis for the juridical provisions governing the press.

Article 2 of the Law states: "The independence of the press is a manifestation of the sovereignty of the people based on the principles of democracy, justice and the rule of law."

Although it is realized that freedom of the press is a pillar of democracy. However, their existence has repeatedly been tried by them for certain purposes. Not by other problems, but rather by regulations or laws produced by DPR or government institutions. Until the question arose whether it was intentional due to the ignorance factor of the formulator of the law.

A real attack was felt at the end, namely the emergence of a number of articles in the revision of Law no. 32 of 2002 concerning Broadcasting, which is considered to be an entry point for efforts to silence Press freedom. This revision was shouted at by a number of circles because it suddenly hit the ban on the broadcast of exclusive journalistic investigative coverage. Like lightning in broad holes, the rules hurt a number of people, such as the Press Council and other press components. So they rushed to reject the revision.

The Director of LBH Pers, Ade Wahyudin, explained that from his repeated attack pattern, according to him, it must have been intentional, "But it was intentional in a sense that the legislator or the formulating team could not distinguish which journalistic content was not, so the formulation was also random," said Ade when contacted by VOI last week.

Ade believes that the main target is to limit journalistic content, but it is carried out haphazardly and wrapped on behalf of other activities such as mystical broadcasts, bans on the broadcast of various forms of sex, and about LGBT.

Based on the Draft of the Broadcasting Bill which is known to contain 14 chapters with 149 articles, a number of articles were found that were contradictory and threatened press freedom. And it is known that for reasons of strengthening broadcasting institutions (KPI), there is an authority that will actually conflict with the function of the Press Council in the Press Law No. 40/1999. At least 3 revised articles reap polemic. Among other things, it can be seen in Article 50 B Paragraph 2 letter c. regarding the prohibition of exclusive broadcast of investigative journalism.

Then article 8 A letter (q) draft Revision in which it is stated "That KPI in carrying out its duties has the authority to resolve a special journalistic dispute in the broadcasting field," This overlaps with what is regulated by Law 40/1999 that press disputes are resolved by the Press Council.

Also Article 42 paragraph 2 that the journalistic dispute is handled by KPI. Meanwhile, based on the Press Law, the resolution of the journalistic dispute was carried out by the press council. As if KPI wants to crash into the authority of the Press Council which has been regulated by law.

Meanwhile in Article 51 letter E, the revision is stated "It is prohibited to create broadcast content that contains insults and defamation. Because it is used to throw someone into prison under the pretext of defamation. When many parties question the application of the rubber article of the ITE Law, this article actually appears in this revision.

So articles such as Article 8A letter (q), Article 42 paragraph 2, and Article 51 letter E are considered to overlap with those that have been regulated by the Press Law. This article stipulates that the resolution of journalistic disputes is carried out in court.

The chairman of the revised Central Broadcasting Commission, Ubaidillah, once submitted Law Number 32 of 2002 concerning Broadcasting, which has an urgency to clarify the definitions between the new media, social media, digital media and its slices with conventional media. The revision of the Broadcasting Law is also directed to encourage the strengthening of KPI institutions, especially the coordination relationship between the Central KPI and Regional KPI.

This digital space setting step has an urgency to reflect on the growth in the digital space where the massive growth of internet users is not in line with the growth of content quality. Plus the problem of digital literacy which is still PR and digital GTeeper to unquality content.

One thing that was then highlighted was the expansion of the scope of KPI's authority which actually collided with other institutions, which had the same authority, for example the Press Council. However, the urgency was then questioned by the press, because they questioned the journalistic case that had been regulated by other laws.

In addition to some of these things, the revision of the Broadcasting Law is considered a threat to press freedom, previously the same attack repeatedly threatened the Law on the Press of Law No. 40/1999.

Yadi Hendriana, from the Press Ethics Complaints and Enforcement Commission, the Press Council, revealed that his party had repeatedly detected similar attacks. Members of the IJTI organization noted that several rules and regulations were deemed to be in conflict with press freedom, including the Election Law and a number of articles detected which actually threatened press freedom.

His party admitted that they could not appoint which group and party did that. However, the pattern is the same as being entrusted to the regulations that are being prepared. "Maybe it was done by parties or groups who were not happy with the existence of press freedom. Attacks on Press Freedom according to Yadi repeatedly occurred and like trying to weaken", said Yadi, contacted by VOI last week.

Freedom Of Opinion Is Tackled, Indonesian Democracy Is At The Lowest Point!

Starting with the emergence of the 2007 Election Law for holding elections in 2019, it was felt that there were articles that interfered with press freedom, at which time there was a ban on reporting related to calm times. This clearly caused a reaction among the press, they urged the KPU and Bawaslu to cancel the regulation. The pressure to revoke the regulation was successful.

Surprisingly, after being revoked in 2019, the regulation was again included in the 2024 General Election. Because the points of the regulation were the same, again the press protested strongly to the DPR and Baleg. And the regulation was again successfully revoked. "We protested to the Minister of Home Affairs and the KPU until the PKPU about this rule was changed or for the press to be excluded," said Yadi.

"After the incident, we thought that the undermining of press freedom was over, apparently not, the attack turned out to be included through the Job Creation Law," he said. In the Job Creation Law through Article 18 it was clear that there was government interference to regulate everything related to the press. "We and various friends protested, until the Baleg finally the provision was revoked (take out). From there we know that members of the DPR themselves do not know, if the rules regarding the press can enter there," said Yadi.

The Job Creation Law, which is intended to boost investment and for the sake of economic growth. It is also considered to be full of articles that contradict press freedom. The law, which consists of 11 clusters, 15 chapters, 174 articles, spread across 79 laws with 1,203 articles, will be simplified by the Jokowi Government into one law that is named the Job Creation Law. Of the 79 laws include the press Law / Law 40/1999 in it. However, the Presspersons shouted and urged that Article 87 of the Job Creation Bill be revoked because it was contrary to the Press Law, especially regarding foreign capital and the provisions on criminal matters. As a result of the protest, the DPR finally revoked the Press Law contained in the Job Creation Law.

In addition to the Job Creation Law, the threat to press freedom also came from Law No. 11 of 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE). Ratified at the end of March 2008, the ITE Law contained criminal provisions for information spreaders that could cause hatred or hostility to individuals and / or certain community groups based on ethnicity, race, religion, and intergroup. The chairman of the press council at that time, Ichlasul Amal, had refused and sent a letter to the Minister of Communication and Information expressing objections to the contents of the law because it threatened press freedom.

Until the era of the Minister of Communication and Information Budi Arie Setiadi, the second revision of Law Number 11 of 2008 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions (UU ITE) was passed into law on December 6, 2023. However, the Chairperson of the Press Council, Ninik Rahayu, stated that he was dissatisfied with the revision because he did not provide a significant change to the articles that became the threat of press independence. For example, Article 27A, regarding the distribution or transmission of information or electronic documents that have charges of accusations or slander and/or defamation, is still entrenched there.

Next, the threat is also seen in the Criminal Code Bill, which is currently in the public socialization period. According to Yadi, there are 19 articles in the Criminal Code that threaten press freedom. There are 10 to 14 articles indicated to attack press freedom that have taken out, but some have finally passed. And entered the point of consideration, but they were excluded for the press. Until there, friends feel satisfied with the achievement. They are now waiting to be promulgated and admit that they are ready to conduct a judicial review to the Constitutional Court.

The obstacle to press freedom was judged by Yadi to have been completed. It turned out that there was an arrangement regarding the press in the Broadcasting Law during the Imi. "We don't know who the perpetrators were, but the legal drafting should have been known that the rules were already elsewhere. If you look at the word per word, it should be seen. From there it can be concluded that there was a systematic intentional agreement, whether by whom the goal was to undermine press freedom," he said.

"Don't want to be Suudzon, maybe this is just our prejudice. We hope that's not the case. But for those who understand or are related to it, please stop playing with efforts to undermine press freedom." he said. If the press has been controlled by certain forces and is full of group political content, what will happen to the fate of this nation in the future. It is concluded what, but the reality is that there is a systematic effort to control the press again. Maintaining press freedom is not only for the press but for the public interest and maintaining democracy.

Responding to which party has an interest in weakening press freedom, human rights activist Usman Hamid tries to analyze the party most interested in investigative shows is the government. Because so far those who feel disturbed are them. According to him, they have not been able to reach the Press Law because they are protected by the Press Council because the method is through the Broadcasting Law. Wrapped in writing regulates the prohibition of broadcasting sexuality activities, LGBT activities and so on. However, the main targets actually want to limit the press.

According to Usman, the results of research by many experts from within and outside the country, they concluded that Indonesia's democracy is in crisis. This was marked by the increase in repressiveness of the apparatus, the strengthening of the Cyber and the ITE Law, strengthening the Executive and the weakness of Legislation. There is no opposition to political parties. They want to control the press, including the prohibition of investigations, even though they know it is part of public control. So far, to control the press, they have not been able to because it is protected by the Press Law which is guarded by the Press Council, in the end they through the Broadcasting Bill, want to weaken the press.