Prosecutor Eddy Arta Wijaya has demanded a six-month prison sentence\nfor \u2018Bali Tidak Diam\u2019 activist Tomy Priatna Wiria in a case concerning\nalleged incitement. During the sentencing hearing at the Denpasar\nDistrict Court on Tuesday, the prosecutor stated that Tomy was proven to\nhave violated Article 247 of the new Criminal Code regarding public\nincitement or incitement through information technology.<\/p>\n
\u2018We demand that the defendant Tomy Priatna Wiria be sentenced to six\nmonths in prison, reduced by the time already served in detention,\u2019 the\nprosecutor stated. The prosecution argued that all elements of Article\n247 of the Criminal Code had been fulfilled. Tomy was deemed proven to\nhave broadcast, displayed, played, or disseminated information\ncontaining incitement with the intent of making it publicly known. The\nprosecutor cited Tomy\u2019s actions as an aggravating factor because they\nwere considered to have disrupted security and public order, while his\npolite demeanour during the trial was considered a mitigating\nfactor.<\/p>\n
Responding to the demand, Tomy\u2019s legal counsel, Ignatius Radhite,\nstated that his team would submit a defence plea. Tomy will also deliver\na personal defence. \u2018We are submitting a plea. Both the legal counsel\nand the defendant will submit a plea. We are requesting two weeks to\nreview the prosecutor\u2019s demands,\u2019 Ignatius said. The panel of judges\nsubsequently scheduled the plea hearing for Thursday, 20 July 2026.\nIgnatius noted that his team needed time to re-examine the construction\nof the prosecutor\u2019s demands against the facts revealed during the\ntrial.<\/p>\n
He highlighted the six-month prison demand, noting that the sentence\nmust be reduced by the time Tomy has already spent in detention. \u2018Tomy\nis being demanded six months minus time served. This means Tomy has\nalready been detained for more than six months,\u2019 he said. Ignatius also\nquestioned the basis for the prosecutor\u2019s demands, arguing that the\nconstruction relied more heavily on the police investigation report than\non the facts presented in court. \u2018The demands built by the prosecutor do\nnot refer to the trial facts, but to the BAP,\u2019 he stated. He mentioned\nthat several witnesses actually revealed repressive actions they had\nexperienced, which should have been considered in viewing Tomy\u2019s case\ncomprehensively.<\/p>\n
Ignatius further scrutinised the prosecutor\u2019s use of Article 247 of\nthe Criminal Code, insisting that the article must be viewed based on\nthe indicted elements and the concrete facts proven in court. He\ntherefore assessed that the six-month demand did not reflect the trial\nfacts. Furthermore, Ignatius claimed that the legal process against Tomy\nhad instead strengthened his client\u2019s position as a human rights\ndefender voicing criticism and freedom of expression. He also\nhighlighted a three-week delay in the reading of the demands, suggesting\nit indicated a lack of confidence in the prosecution\u2019s case.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Tomy asserted that he never felt he had committed the acts\nhe was accused of. He maintained that what he voiced were issues and\naspirations felt by citizens and the community. \u2018I have never once felt\nguilty. Looking at the trial facts, Tomy should be freed. This six-month\ndemand is just a formal demand from the prosecutor,\u2019 Tomy said after the\nhearing. He argued that conveying such aspirations is part of the\npublic\u2019s right to express opinions and criticise government policy, and\ntherefore he should be acquitted.<\/p>\n
The case against Tomy Priatna Wiria originated from his activities\nwith the \u2018Bali Tidak Diam\u2019 movement in August 2025. Tomy, known as an\nactivist and human rights advocate, was subsequently processed legally\nover a number of activities and posts that investigators and prosecutors\ndeemed to contain incitement. The prosecution brought the case to the\nDenpasar District Court, where the prosecution and the defence have held\ndiffering views on the context of the posts and activities forming the\nbasis of the charges. The defence has consistently denied the\naccusations, arguing that their client\u2019s activities are part of freedom\nof expression and a citizen\u2019s right to criticise the government.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/activist-from-bali-tidak-diam-faces-six-month-prison-demand-1785822666", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }