Indonesia is one of the world's largest democracies, but it's weaponising defamation laws to smother dissent
While their astonishing acquittal is welcome, the case marked a bleak new low for freedom of expression in one of the world’s largest democracies.
- While their astonishing acquittal is welcome, the case marked a bleak new low for freedom of expression in one of the world’s largest democracies.
- Luhut’s statements made it clear the case was expressly intended to create a chilling effect and smother civil society criticism of the government.
A messy web of mining interests
- In the video, the pair mentioned that Luhut was “implicated” or “involved” (bermain) in mining in Wabu Block, in the Intan Jaya district of what is now Central Papua Province.
- The details are a bit complicated, but a key part of the dispute centred on this point about mining.
- In 2016, Australian mining firm West Wits Mining reported to the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) that its Indonesian subsidiary Madinah Quarataa’in had entered into an agreement with another company, Tobacom Del Mandiri.
- But given his stock portfolio, the activists had a relatively firm basis for implying Luhut was “involved” in mining in Papua.
Making an example of activism
- According to Indonesian digital rights organisation SAFEnet, 89 people were
reported under the law between January and October 2023. - Public anger over the arbitrary way the law has been applied led the government to publish guidelines for law enforcers on its implementation.
- According to the guidelines, defamation charges should not be brought when assertions are based on analysis, opinion or facts.
- The government also regularly subjects foreign donors to interrogation from everyone from police to intelligence agencies, about their planned activities.
Increasingly authoritarian tactics
- Appealing to nationalistic sensibilities and raising questions about civil society organisations like this is a classic technique of authoritarian governments.
- Legal attacks like the one against Haris and Fatia are designed to wear civil society down.
- Fronting up in court every week is time consuming, emotionally draining, and takes activists away from their work.
- Further, the use of judicial harassment to target activists, in contrast to cruder tactics such as cyberattacks or physical violence, is designed to lend an air of legitimacy to government repression.
Tim Mann does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.