Criminal Liability for Demonstration Documentation under the ITE Law: Distinguishing Recording, Dissemination, and Criminal Assistance in Decision No. 1027/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Bdg
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article examines criminal liability for demonstration documentation by rigorously separating three distinct legal bases: recording an event, disseminating the resulting material, and intentionally assisting an underlying offence. Bandung District Court Decision No. 1027/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Bdg is used as a normative case study. The analysis combines statutory, case, and conceptual approaches to Law No. 1 of 2024 on Electronic Information and Transactions, Constitutional Court Decision No. 105/PUU-XXII/2024, and the former Criminal Code rules on criminal assistance applicable to the August 2025 tempus delicti. The study finds that the absence of professional-journalist status does not by itself make recording or dissemination “without right”. Criminal assistance requires intentional and functionally relevant facilitation of the principal offence; recording conduct after a completed violent act therefore does not automatically assist that completed act. Following Constitutional Court Decision No. 105/PUU-XXII/2024, Article 28(2) in conjunction with Article 45A(2) must be confined to intentional and public identity-based hate content that creates a real risk of discrimination, hostility, or violence. A closed WhatsApp transmission must consequently be distinguished from broader public social-media publication, while hostility toward the police as a state institution cannot simply be equated with hatred based on the protected identity grounds. The district-court decision is treated as an illustration of first-instance judicial reasoning rather than binding precedent.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Ariany, Lisda, and Sandi P. Perdana. “Batasan Kebebasan Berpendapat di Indonesia Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia.” Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis 5, no. 12 (2025). https://doi.org/10.56370/jhlg.v5i12.988.
Arifin, Zainal, Zico Junius Fernando, and Emi Puasa Handayani. “Implikasi Hukum Perubahan Kedua Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik: Menyeimbangkan Kebebasan Berpendapat dan Partisipasi Publik dalam Demokrasi Digital.” LITIGASI 26, no. 1 (2025): 192–227. https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v26i1.21555.
Bahram, Muhammad. “Tantangan Hukum dan Etika (Rekayasa Sosial terhadap Kebebasan Berpendapat di Dunia Digital).” SENTRI: Jurnal Riset Ilmiah 2, no. 12 (2023): 5092–5109. https://doi.org/10.55681/sentri.v2i12.1895.
Bunga, Dewi, and Ni Putu Diana Sari. “Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan dalam Delik Kejahatan Terhadap Nyawa (Kajian terhadap Unsur Kesengajaan dengan Alasan Pembelaan Diri).” Satya Dharma: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 7, no. 1 (2024): 311–320. https://doi.org/10.33363/sd.v7i1.1242.
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Decision No. 105/PUU-XXII/2024, April 29, 2025.
Detik Sumsel. “Terdakwa Kasus Demo Agustus 2025 Dituntut 1 Tahun Penjara, Rifa Rahnabila Angkat Suara.” January 2026. https://www.detiksumsel.com/nasional/97416602560/terdakwa-kasus-demo-agustus-2025-dituntut-1-tahun-penjara-rifa-rahnabila-angkat-suara.
Harsya, Rabith Madah Khulaili. “Tinjauan Yuridis terhadap Tanggung Jawab Platform Digital atas Konten Ilegal Menurut Hukum Indonesia.” Sanskara Hukum dan HAM 4, no. 1 (2025): 276–286. https://doi.org/10.58812/shh.v4i01.609.
Karo Karo, Rizky Pratama Putra. “Hate Speech: Penyimpangan terhadap UU ITE, Kebebasan Berpendapat dan Nilai-Nilai Keadilan Bermartabat.” Jurnal Lemhannas RI 10, no. 4 (2022): 52–65. https://doi.org/10.55960/jlri.v10i4.370.
Marsilindo, Rizky Pratama Putra Karo-Karo, and Bambang Widarto. “Penggunaan Alat Bukti Digital dalam Pembuktiian Tindak Pidana Siber di Pengadilan Indonesia.” Judge: Jurnal Hukum 6, no. 8 (2026): 1527–1538. https://doi.org/10.54209/judge.v6i08.2213.
Pratiwi, Siswantari. “Delik Penyertaan Dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP).” Binamulia Hukum 11, no. 1 (2022): 69–80. https://doi.org/10.37893/jbh.v11i1.307.
Putri, Dwi Jayanti, and Yasarman. “Rekonstruksi Mengenai Pengaturan dan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Terhadap Tindak Pidana Ujaran Kebencian di Media Sosial.” Jurnal Kewarganegaraan 6, no. 3 (2022): 6390–6398. https://doi.org/10.31316/jk.v6i3.4145.
Rachman, M. Taufik, and Bahri Yamin. “Implikasi Yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 105/PUU-XXII/2024 Terhadap Penegakan Hukum Tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik.” Unizar Law Review 8, no. 1 (2025): 67–76. https://doi.org/10.36679/ulr.v8i1.95.
Republic of Indonesia. Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia of 1945.
Republic of Indonesia. Law No. 40 of 1999 on the Press.
Republic of Indonesia. Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code.
Republic of Indonesia. Law No. 1 of 2024 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions.
Republic of Indonesia. Law No. 1 of 2026 on Criminal Penalty Adjustments.
Bandung District Court. Decision No. 1027/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Bdg, February 2, 2026.
Susanto, Joko, Sasetya Bayu Effendi, Rinanda Asrian Ilmanta, Royce Wijaya Setya Putra, and Reza Aulya Ramadhan. “Perlindungan Hukum bagi Jurnalis dalam Peliputan Demonstrasi.” Jurnal Kabar Masyarakat 2, no. 4 (2024): 284–301. https://doi.org/10.54066/jkb.v2i4.2691.
Wahyuni, Rizki, and Yati Sharfina Desiandri. “Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) Pada Kebebasan Berpendapat/Berekspresi dalam Negara Demokrasi di Indonesia.” Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi 5, no. 3 (2024): 961–966. https://doi.org/10.55338/saintek.v5i3.2422.