Jurisprudence Shaping Digital Rights in Southeast Asia
2. INTERNET SHUTDOWNS
Internet shutdown is a measure taken by
a state or authority, or on behalf of the
government to intentionally disrupt access to and the use of information and
communications systems online.17 This
measure includes limiting a large number
of people from using online communication tools or restricting internet connectivity at large. Typically, the pretext
for such imposition have been national
interest and security, emergency, general
election, and public order. The Global Internet Shutdown report indicated that in
2021 alone, Myanmar has imposed internet shutdown fifteen times while Indonesia carried out two shutdowns.18 Despite
an increase in the number of internet
shutdowns carried out by governments
in Southeast Asian countries, there have
been very few legal actions taken to challenge the practice in courts.
government’s measure to disrupt internet access to several places in the province of Papua as a response to demonstrations of Papuan students and activists
in August 2019. This petition was the
second attempt to challenge the Law no
11/2008 on IET after their first attempt
to submit a review to the Constitutional
Court failed. The petitioners asserted that
the government intentionally disrupted
internet access in Papua through three
measures, first by throttling the internet
connection to slow down internet bandwidth in several places in Papua; second,
through disrupting fully telecommunication networks across Papua province
and West Papua Province, which left 42
regencies in Papua without any internet
connection for 14 days; and third by partially disrupting internet access in four
regencies in Papua Province.21 According
to the petitioners, these measures violated both good governance principles and
human rights standards applicable. The
government claimed that the measure
was necessary and in accordance with the
mandate provided in Art 40 (2b) of the IET
Law to prevent the spread of electronic
information containing hate speech, incitement to violence and hoaxes.
One landmark decision issued by the Administrative Court in Indonesia in 2019
sheds light on how courts view this problematic practice. The administrative court
decision in Indonesia, in AJI, Safenet v
the Ministry of Communication and Informatics (MCI) (2020)19 referred to human rights principles in striking down the
government measure to cut off internet
access in Papua, particularly opining on
the legality of use of a state of emergency to justify derogation of rights.20 In December 2019, Aliansi Jurnalis Independen
(AJI), an organisation promoting press
freedom, together with SAFEnet Indonesia, a civil society organisation, submitted
a petition to the administrative court in
Jakarta, challenging the legality of the
The court opined that Art 40 (2b) should
be interpreted to give the government
authority to cut off access only to certain (individual) electronic information
containing prohibited content and therefore, disrupting internet access to a large
number of people or locations cannot be
justified. The court stated that disruption
of internet access is a form of derogation
See https://www.accessnow.org/internet-shutdowns-2022/
See https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/direktori/download_file/1e64accbf1684df97b938c64ce3e711a/
pdf/5a526ec9f653a865d177295d5763366c
20
Administrative Court Decision, no 230/G/TF/2019/PTUN-JKT, accessible at https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/
direktori/download_file/1e64accbf1684df97b938c64ce3e711a/pdf/5a526ec9f653a865d177295d5763366c
21
Administrative Court Decision, no 230/G/TF/2019/PTUN-JKT, accessible at https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/
direktori/download_file/1e64accbf1684df97b938c64ce3e711a/pdf/5a526ec9f653a865d177295d5763366c
18
19
11
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents