House Member Welcomes Constitutional Court Ruling on Presidential Defamation Articles

House of Representatives Commission XIII member overseeing law, human rights, immigration and corrections, Rieke Diah Pitaloka, has welcomed the Constitutional Court (MK) ruling on the presidential insult article, which was partially granted by the court.

In its ruling, the MK affirmed based on the constitution that only the president and vice president may report alleged violations of the insult article. Rieke assessed that the ruling serves as a counterbalance between two interests: the personal honour of the president/vice president and the people’s freedom to speak, criticise, oversee and correct power.

“The MK did not abolish the criminal offence of insulting the president/vice president, but affirmed that such cases can only be prosecuted based on a complaint by the president and/or vice president,” Rieke said in Jakarta on Friday (14/8), as quoted from Antara.

According to her, ruling Number 275/PUU-XXIII/2025 has provided an important constitutional limitation on Article 218, Article 219 and Article 220 of Law Number 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code (KUHP), and must therefore be viewed as an effort to balance these two interests.

Rieke explained that the president is a public official, not a person immune to criticism.

According to her, criticism of policy is not an insult, oversight is not a personal attack, and difference of opinion is not a crime.

Therefore, she said, the application of Article 218 and Article 219 of the KUHP must not become a gateway to the criminalisation of dissenting voices.

She said the National Criminal Code has provided room for acts carried out in the public interest or in self-defence. This principle must serve as the primary safeguard in law enforcement.

The same principle, according to her, must be applied in the digital space. Law Number 1 of 2024 on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE) regulates defamation or attacks on honour through electronic systems, but these provisions have a validity period linked to the entry into force of the National Criminal Code.

“The National Criminal Code has been in force since 2 January 2026, so harmonisation between the KUHP and the ITE Law regime must be carried out carefully to avoid overlap and layered criminalisation,” said the PDIP politician.

Rieke reminded that the digital space must not become a lawless space, but also must not become a space without a constitution. Criticism conveyed through social media remains part of freedom of expression as long as it does not fulfil the elements of a criminal offence.

“I emphasise that a state of law must not turn feelings of offence into a criminal offence,” she said.

Through the ruling, Rieke assessed that it further affirms that law enforcement officials are obliged to clearly distinguish criticism, satire, opinion, oversight and correction from insult, defamation, threats or other criminal offences.

“Officials must examine context, intent, target, public interest, form of expression, and whether the criminal elements are fulfilled. A single sentence must not be taken out of context and then used as a legal trap,” said Rieke.

With the issuance of the MK ruling, Rieke recommended that the National Police and the Attorney General’s Office must apply MK ruling Number 275/PUU-XXIII/2025 consistently.

“No third party may act in the name of the president/vice president to initiate criminal proceedings for insult,” she said.

Furthermore, assessment of such matters must be based on context, evidence, criminal elements, proportionality and public interest.

She also recommended that the government and the DPR must ensure harmonisation of the National Criminal Code with the ITE Law and all criminal regulations to prevent overlapping norms that create legal uncertainty and a chilling effect on freedom of expression.

“We are not choosing between the honour of the president and the freedom of the people. We are ensuring that both remain in constitutional balance,” she said.

She added that the president must be respected as a human being and a state official. But presidential power must remain open to criticism as public power. For democracy is not a garden where only praise may grow, but democracy is a space where criticism, correction and the courage to speak the truth remain alive.

“Do not let the law become a wall that silences the people’s voice. Make the law a bridge that safeguards human dignity while limiting the arbitrariness of power,” said Rieke, who is also known as an arts activist.