Civil Society Groups File Judicial Review on Negative Content Regulation

Christina Desy, Agus Sahbani
 
Indonesia’s fight against pornography and illegal activities on the internet, popularly known as “negative content” seemed to be on the right track when the Minister of Communication and Information Technology issued Regulation No. 19 of 2014 on Controlling Internet Websites Containing Negative Content (“Regulation”).
 
The Regulation provides a legal basis for the government to block internet sites which are deemed to contain negative content. Unfortunately, the Regulation fails to elaborate in any detail as to what can be categorized as “negative content”, and merely states that negative content covers “pornography materials and illegal acts”.
 
As a result, many websites are being blocked under improper procedures and without the consistent application of tangible criteria. An educative website addressed www.bfmodneo.com, for example, was recently blockedbecause it contains a breastfeeding video. In addition, the government has also blocked the emodels.co.uk site as the web address contains the word “model”.
 
To prevent similar blockage of websites in the future, a group of civil society organizations have decided to file a judicial review on the Regulation with the Supreme Court. After planning the judicial reviewfor approximately three months, these groups finally filed their judicial review with the Supreme Court last Friday.
 
The applicant organizations include the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR), the Public Studies and Advocacy Institution (ELSAM), the Press Legal Aid Institute (LBH Pers), as well as Information and Communication Technology Watch (ICT Watch).
 
Elaborating on the judicial review application, ICJR’s representative, Robert Sidauruk, stated that the Regulation does not have provide a sufficiently certain legal basis to provides definitive authority for the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology to determine whether a site violates prevailing laws and regulations, let alone to block a website.
 
“The Regulation is based on Law No. 11 of 2008on Electronic Information and Transactions as well as Law No. 44 of 2008on Pornography, which provide no legitimate reasons for the Ministry to block a website,” Mr. Sidauruk explained last Friday at the Supreme Court.
 
Moreover, Mr. Sidauruk believes that the Regulation lacks any clear limitations on content that may be classified as negative content. This lack of clear limitations may lead into human rights violations under the constitutional right to access information and Law No. 14 of 2008on Disclosure of Public Information.
 
Mr. Sidauruk suggests that the subject matter of the Regulation to be set out in a law. If that were the case, there could be public participation to ensure proper transparency and accountability in the application of such a regulation rather than been at the discretion of government administrators.
 
Sharing Mr. Sidauruk’s view, ELSAM’s representative Wahyudi Jafar also believes that the subject matter under the Regulation is should be set out in a law, not a ministerial regulation. Mr. Jafar is urging the Supreme Court to take serious note on the vague definition for “negative content” under the Regulation which raises the possibility of multi-interpretations and may hamper the public’s right to obtain information, as well as freedom of expression.
 
Representing the hope of his fellow petitioners, Mr. Jafar expects the Supreme Court to immediately review and then repeal the Regulation.
 
(For more information on the Regulation, see ILB No. 2451)
 
(hot/kc)