Indonesia’s Delicate Balance: Combating Disinformation While Preserving Freedom

Indonesian Democracy at Risk as Government Pursues Disinformation Regulations

Indonesia’s government is moving forward with plans to regulate disinformation and foreign propaganda, raising concerns about the potential impact on the country’s already fragile democratic institutions. While not officially included in current legislative agendas, an academic background paper for the bill circulated in early January, with Coordinating Minister for Law, Human Rights, Immigration, and Corrections Yusril Mahendra publicly confirming the initiative will proceed.

The proposed legislation comes at a time when experts warn that Indonesia’s democratic foundations are under significant strain. Multiple approaches exist to address disinformation, including platform interventions, algorithmic accountability, media independence support, and public literacy campaigns. However, research across various disciplines suggests regulatory approaches face substantial challenges in countries like Indonesia, where information controls have historically been applied selectively.

One major obstacle is the fundamental structure of digital ecosystems. Current platform business models prioritize engagement over information integrity, with algorithms that systematically amplify polarizing and misleading content. Technical limitations such as encrypted communications and anonymity tools further complicate enforcement efforts. While automated moderation and content flagging exist, these measures remain insufficient without addressing the underlying incentives that reward engagement regardless of content quality.

Perhaps more concerning is the documented pattern of such laws being weaponized against journalists, critics, and civil society organizations. Between 2010 and 2022, at least 80 countries introduced legislation addressing misinformation, with that number jumping to 151 by 2023. Most rely heavily on criminal sanctions including imprisonment and fines, reflecting a security-oriented approach rather than one focused on media integrity.

The application of these laws varies dramatically by region. In liberal democracies like Canada and Australia, penalties typically target narrowly defined cases such as foreign interference in democratic processes. By contrast, more authoritarian regimes frequently use similar laws against journalists and activists, often with limited transparency or due process.

Indonesia’s recent history illustrates these risks. During nationwide protests in August 2025, the government reportedly responded with excessive force and mass arrests while simultaneously tightening control over public information. Civil society activists were detained without clear legal status, digital platforms including TikTok live-streaming faced restrictions, and authorities were criticized for tolerating coordinated online harassment campaigns against civil society groups.

Since 2009, under former President Joko Widodo’s administration, the government has claimed to fight fake news while effectively controlling information flows. Enforcement has been notably selective, targeting websites and social media accounts critical of official narratives while allowing pro-government sources to operate freely, even when they spread misleading information.

Indonesia’s digital literacy program has prioritized obedience to state ideology over critical engagement with the political interests behind disinformation. By normalizing legal intimidation through the controversial Information and Electronic Transactions Law (UU ITE)—widely criticized as a tool to suppress dissent—the program ultimately undermines democratic resilience rather than strengthening it.

The most troubling aspect concerns definitions and enforcement. When the state holds exclusive authority to determine what constitutes false or misleading information without independent oversight, the line between legitimate counter-disinformation efforts and political control becomes dangerously blurred. The academic paper supporting the new legislation cites provisions in Indonesia’s new Criminal Code that sanction individuals for disseminating false information that results in public disorder—provisions previously revoked by Indonesia’s Constitutional Court in the old code.

Critics note that the definition of “false information” employs loose criteria, creating uncertainty about what can be legally considered false. The bill’s framing of disinformation as a non-military threat to national stability risks conflating public order with national security, potentially creating wide discretionary powers for authorities to restrict legitimate speech.

The timing is particularly notable as Indonesia assumes the Presidency of the United Nations Human Rights Council, a body tasked with promoting human rights and facilitating dialogue among member states. Experts urge the Indonesian government to demonstrate its commitment to these principles by ensuring new legislation includes meaningful participation from diverse stakeholders and protects, rather than undermines, democratic expression.