Parliament Receives Presidential Letter on Cybersecurity and Resilience Bill
The House of Representatives has stated that it has received a presidential letter (surpres) for discussion of draft legislation. House Speaker Puan Maharani stated that the letter has been followed up in accordance with House procedural rules.
The presidential letters received by Parliament include the Witness and Victim Protection Bill with letter number R-06 and the Cybersecurity and Resilience Bill with letter number R-07, according to Maharani.
Another presidential letter received by Parliament concerns the plan for approval of a comprehensive economic partnership agreement between the Indonesian government and the Canadian government, stated Puan during the 16th plenary session of the fourth session of the 2025-2026 parliamentary term on Thursday, 12 March 2026.
Puan stated that the three presidential letters will be processed in accordance with mechanism and priority procedures. However, she did not provide detailed explanation of when Parliament’s leadership received the presidential letters.
“We will process them according to priority, following the mechanisms that we apply in the best possible manner,” said the PDIP politician.
Various civil society organisations have raised criticism regarding the Cybersecurity and Resilience Bill. They argue that the bill potentially threatens human rights and civil liberties.
Researcher at Raksha Initiatives, Parasurama Pamungkas, highlighted a misconception in the formulation of the cybersecurity resilience concept. Resilience should be understood as system resilience or robustness, not military-oriented cyber defence.
However, in the academic framework they possess, the term resilience is identified with cyber defence. “Yet the scope differs,” said Parasurama on Tuesday, 23 December 2025.
This assessment emerged during a discussion by Raksha Initiatives, Centra Initiative, Imparsial, and DeJure. Civil society organisations assessed that despite undergoing several changes compared to the draft discussed in 2019 and early 2024, the substance of the bill still contains numerous issues.
The misconception has resulted in the absence of a human-centric approach in the Cybersecurity and Resilience Bill. The formulation of the bill’s objectives is seen as emphasising national security rather than protecting individuals.
“Good cybersecurity should protect individuals first, then devices and networks,” said Parasurama.
From a procedural perspective, limited transparency and weak stakeholder engagement have also been highlighted. The bill is assessed as not yet reflecting the principle of multistakeholderism, including involvement from industry and civil society.
This situation is feared to open risks to civil liberties, protection of vulnerable groups, and press freedom.
Press Freedom Foundation (LBH Pers) advocacy staff Chikita Edrina assessed that the absence of individual protection guarantees in the Cybersecurity and Resilience Bill could potentially add pressure on press freedom.
“Journalists not only face hacking, but also doxing and account breaches,” said Chikita.