The House of Representatives has stated that it has received a\npresidential letter (surpres) for discussion of draft legislation. House\nSpeaker Puan Maharani stated that the letter has been followed up in\naccordance with House procedural rules.<\/p>\n
The presidential letters received by Parliament include the Witness\nand Victim Protection Bill with letter number R-06 and the Cybersecurity\nand Resilience Bill with letter number R-07, according to Maharani.<\/p>\n
Another presidential letter received by Parliament concerns the plan\nfor approval of a comprehensive economic partnership agreement between\nthe Indonesian government and the Canadian government, stated Puan\nduring the 16th plenary session of the fourth session of the 2025-2026\nparliamentary term on Thursday, 12 March 2026.<\/p>\n
Puan stated that the three presidential letters will be processed in\naccordance with mechanism and priority procedures. However, she did not\nprovide detailed explanation of when Parliament\u2019s leadership received\nthe presidential letters.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe will process them according to priority, following the mechanisms\nthat we apply in the best possible manner,\u201d said the PDIP\npolitician.<\/p>\n
Various civil society organisations have raised criticism regarding\nthe Cybersecurity and Resilience Bill. They argue that the bill\npotentially threatens human rights and civil liberties.<\/p>\n
Researcher at Raksha Initiatives, Parasurama Pamungkas, highlighted a\nmisconception in the formulation of the cybersecurity resilience\nconcept. Resilience should be understood as system resilience or\nrobustness, not military-oriented cyber defence.<\/p>\n
However, in the academic framework they possess, the term resilience\nis identified with cyber defence. \u201cYet the scope differs,\u201d said\nParasurama on Tuesday, 23 December 2025.<\/p>\n
This assessment emerged during a discussion by Raksha Initiatives,\nCentra Initiative, Imparsial, and DeJure. Civil society organisations\nassessed that despite undergoing several changes compared to the draft\ndiscussed in 2019 and early 2024, the substance of the bill still\ncontains numerous issues.<\/p>\n
The misconception has resulted in the absence of a human-centric\napproach in the Cybersecurity and Resilience Bill. The formulation of\nthe bill\u2019s objectives is seen as emphasising national security rather\nthan protecting individuals.<\/p>\n
\u201cGood cybersecurity should protect individuals first, then devices\nand networks,\u201d said Parasurama.<\/p>\n
From a procedural perspective, limited transparency and weak\nstakeholder engagement have also been highlighted. The bill is assessed\nas not yet reflecting the principle of multistakeholderism, including\ninvolvement from industry and civil society.<\/p>\n
This situation is feared to open risks to civil liberties, protection\nof vulnerable groups, and press freedom.<\/p>\n
Press Freedom Foundation (LBH Pers) advocacy staff Chikita Edrina\nassessed that the absence of individual protection guarantees in the\nCybersecurity and Resilience Bill could potentially add pressure on\npress freedom.<\/p>\n
\u201cJournalists not only face hacking, but also doxing and account\nbreaches,\u201d said Chikita.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/parliament-receives-presidential-letter-on-cybersecurity-and-resilience-bill-1773302005", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }