Student activist tried for inciting 'Bali will not be silent' mobilisation campaign
Student activist Tomy Priatna Wiria underwent his first hearing on charges related to social media posts concerning a mobilisation campaign for “Bali akan tidak diam” (Bali will not be silent) at Denpasar District Court on Tuesday 17 March 2026.
Public Prosecutor Eddy Atha Wijaya, in his indictment, outlined that Tomy faced charges under Article 247 of the Criminal Code in Law Number 1 of 2023 on incitement to commit violence or resist state authority, as well as Article 243(1) of the Criminal Code regarding the spreading of hatred that could lead to violence.
Additionally, prosecutors also pursued alternative charges against Tomy under the Information and Electronic Transactions Law (UU ITE) Article 45A(3) read together with Article 28(3), Law Number 1 of 2024 on the Second Amendment to Law Number 11 of 2008, as well as Article 87 read together with Article 76H of Law Number 23 of 2002 on Child Protection, as amended by Law Number 35 of 2014 and lastly Law Number 17 of 2016 on Child Protection.
“We see a series of actions that started from the creation and distribution of content on social media, which then had an impact on mass mobilisation leading to acts that resulted in riots,” the prosecutor stated.
In the indictment, Tomy was said to have managed the Instagram account @balitidakdiam since May 2025, which was used to upload various content with social and political undertones. On 28 August 2025, the defendant obtained information from social media regarding news that “Affan was killed by police”.
“Without verifying the truthfulness of this information, the defendant then created a digital flyer containing calls to students, online motorcycle taxi riders, and youth groups to carry out mass mobilisation,” the prosecutor said.
The content created by the defendant, according to Eddy, was not merely informative but also contained calls that could be deemed to influence public emotion.
“In the content there were calls directed at specific groups, including students, to participate in mass mobilisation. From there it then developed into acts in the field,” he added.
Regarding the information that formed the basis for the content creation, Eddy said this was also an important part in the construction of the case.
“The facts we outlined in the indictment show that the information used did not go through a verification process. This is what we then assessed contributed to muddying the situation,” he explained.
The content was uploaded on 29 August 2025 and distributed widely. In the indictment it was stated that the upload prompted masses to gather at the Bali Legal Aid Office on the same day, which then developed into plans for a demonstration the following day.
Subsequently, on 30 August 2025, masses held a demonstration in front of Bali Regional Police Headquarters. The prosecutor revealed that the action then resulted in riots with violence against officials and destruction of several state facilities. Masses also moved to the area of the Bali Provincial Parliament Office in Renon, with reports of damage to official vehicles and burning of crowd control equipment.
In the indictment, the Public Prosecutor assessed that the content created and distributed by the defendant contained elements of incitement that sparked public emotion and drove the occurrence of chaos. Additionally, the information that formed the basis for content creation was said to be false or unverified.
Following the reading of the indictment, the judicial panel chaired by Putu Gde Novyartha gave the defendant and his legal adviser the opportunity to file an exception or note of objection at the next hearing.