سابق 3 / 280 التالي

Machine Translated by Google 2. ANTON MUJAHIR, Indonesian citizen, occupation Journalist/Secretary of Defenders of Freedom of Expression Southeast Asia (SAFEnet), residing at Jalan Starling Subuk Dalem Gang V No. 18, Banjar/Neighborhood Tunjung, Peguyungan Kangin Village, District North Denpasar, Bali; 3. NIKE FEBBYSTA ANDARU, Indonesian Citizen, Housewife/Defender Treasurer pekerjaan Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression (SAFEnet), residing at Jalan Anggrek No. 6 RT 001, RW 001, Kelurahan 20 Ilir D IV, Ilir Timur District I, Kota Palembang, South Sumatra; Hereinafter referred to as ………… Plaintiff II; Plaintiff I and Plaintiff II in this dispute authorizes: 1. ADE WAHYUDIN, SHI; 2. AHMAD FATHANAH HARIS, SH; 3. ANDI MUTTAQIEN, SH; 4. ANGGARA, SH; 5. ASFINAWATI, SH; 6. ERA PURNAMASARI, SH, MH; 7. ERASMUS AT NAPITUPULU, SH; 8. FERI KUSUMA, SH; 9. GADING YONGGAR DITYA, SH*; 10. MONA ERVITA, S.H., M.H.*; 11. MUHAMAD ISNUR, SHI; 12. MUHAMMAD BUSYROL FUAD, SH; 13. MUSTAFA, SH*; Page 3 of 280 pages of Decision No.230/ G/ TF/ 2019/ PTUN-JKT

اختر الفقرة المستهدفة3

● ● ●

Alliance of Independent Journalists v. Minister of Communication

Case Law

Country

Indonesia

Country Location

خط العرض: -0.789275

خط الطول: 113.921327

Country Location (مرتبط Case Law): Indonesia

Decision Date: 3 يونيو 2020

Case Status: أُغلقت / إنتهت

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Admissible

Case Outcome (Disposition)

نقض القانون أو الإجراء أو اعتباره غير دستوري

Keywords

Fake News
Internet Shutdown

Judicial Body: المحكمة أول درجة

Court Name: Jakarta State Administrative Court

Case Number: 230/G/TF/2019/PTUN-JKT

Case Summary: On June 3, 2020, the Jakarta State Administrative Court held that the actions taken by the government of shutting down the internet network in West Papua and Papua province were unlawful and ordered the government to pay to the Plaintiffs the amount Rp. 457,000 (Four Hundred Fifty Seven Thousand rupiah) or $30.59 USD approx. The plaintiffs which included organizations advocating for press freedom, digital rights, the right to information and the welfare of the journalists sued the Minister of Communications and Informatics and the President of the Republic of Indonesia for throttling access to the internet in some areas of West Papua province and Papua province on August 19, 2019. The defendants invoked the spread of hoaxes, transmission of false news, racist speech and incitement as the reasons for throttling access to the internet. While recognizing the right to access internet as a fundamental right under the ambit of freedom of expression, the court observed that the restrictions on the freedom of expression must fulfill three conditions: first, restrictions must fulfill one of the following objectives: right to reputation, morality, religious values, security, decency, public order, or public health; second; restrictions must be prescribed by law; third, restrictions must be proportional. The court agreed that the internet was shut down under “security and public order considerations” however the governmental action was not prescribed by law and therefore did not satisfy the second criterion, as the government’s power did not extend to the termination of access to internet network at large but could be used only to terminate access to electronic information/documents that had unlawful content.

Case Significance: By holding that governmental action of shutting down the internet in the whole of West Papua and Papua province violated the right to access the internet, through which other human rights are realized, the Court expanded the freedom of expression. The court also remarked that “freedom of expression and information, including freedom of the press by using any means deemed appropriate to express opinions and information so as to reach as many people as possible, is a fundamental human right which is the basis of other rights and freedoms in a democratic society because it enables people to actualize all their rights and potential for self-development, convey and reveal the truth, and actively participate in the administration of government in order to realize transparent, accountable, responsive, effective and efficient governance (good governance)”. The court also opined that in the case of internet abuse through unlawful content distribution, an appropriate and proportional action would be if the restriction on the right to access the internet is only aimed at the perpetrators […] because if it is carried out in its entirety through the shut down of the internet network, it will have a greater negative impact in the form of derogating other human rights that find a positive realization through the internet.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Source URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

Date Updated: 10 يوليو 2024

المستندات الأولية

Judgement (English Translated)
English
تحميل عرض

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

اختر الفقرة المستهدفة3

Alliance of Independent Journalists v. Minister of Communication

المستندات الأولية

Notifications