The government has explained the reasons behind creating clauses on insults against the President, Vice President, and state institutions in the new Criminal Code (KUHP). Deputy Minister of Law Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej stated that these provisions are limited based on a 2006 Constitutional Court ruling. The rules apply only as complaint-based offenses from relevant leaders.
The Indonesian government has revealed the rationale for establishing clauses on attacks against the honor or dignity of the President and/or Vice President, as well as insults to state institutions, in Law Number 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code (KUHP). This explanation was provided by Deputy Minister of Law and Human Rights Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej, commonly known as Eddy, during a press conference at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights building in Jakarta on Monday.
Eddy explained that one key consideration is the Constitutional Court Decision Number 013-022/PUU-IV/2006 regarding Articles 134 and 136 bis in the old KUHP. That ruling annulled those articles following a case involving a Jaguar car, as the old provisions allowed anyone to file complaints of insult, rather than limiting it to complaint-based offenses.
"So, there was a 2006 MK decision. If you remember, it was the Jaguar car issue. Articles 134 and 136 bis were tested in the Constitutional Court, and the MK annulled those articles," said Eddy.
Based on that decision, the government and DPR formed new, limited insult clauses for state institutions. In the new KUHP, only the President, Vice President, and leaders of the MPR RI, DPD RI, DPR RI, Supreme Court, and Constitutional Court can file complaints. "It was based on the Constitutional Court's considerations that the government and DPR formed insult clauses for state institutions. But we limited them," he added.
Article 218 of the new KUHP stipulates punishment for anyone who publicly attacks the honor of the President or Vice President, with a maximum prison term of three years or a Category IV fine. The second paragraph exempts acts done for public interest or self-defense. Meanwhile, Article 240 covers insults to certain state institutions, also as complaint-based offenses.
"So, it's very limited, and it's a complaint offense. In complaint offenses, the complainant must be the institution's leader," Eddy clarified. These provisions aim to protect the dignity of high officials without allowing indiscriminate complaints.
