Between Protected Expression and Reputational Harm: An Empirical Socio-Legal Study of Judicial Pardon in Indonesia’s Digital Defamation Cases
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22225/scj.9.1.2026.84-96Keywords:
digital defamation, freedom of expression, reputational harm, proportionality, constitutional rightsAbstract
This article examines the empirical boundaries of judicial pardon in Indonesia’s digital defamation cases, focusing on the practical tension between protected expression and reputational harm in law-enforcement practice. Using an empirical socio-legal design, the study combines qualitative analysis of statutes and court decisions with empirical data drawn from documented digital-rights complaints, public reports on criminalization of online expression, internet-use statistics, and selected case materials concerning Article 27A of Law No. 1 of 2024 and Article 54(2) of Law No. 1 of 2023. The empirical orientation enables the article to assess not only what the law provides, but also how digital defamation disputes emerge, how reputational harm is experienced, and how broadly framed criminal provisions may affect public participation. The findings indicate that the application of judicial pardon requires verified factual indicators, including the communicative context of the expression, the identity and position of the complainant, the scale and persistence of digital dissemination, the actual consequences suffered by the affected person, and the offender’s post-offence conduct. The article argues that judicial pardon should operate as an evidence-sensitive sentencing mechanism: it should protect lawful criticism from punitive excess while ensuring that serious, malicious, and empirically demonstrable reputational attacks are not trivialized. The study concludes that empirical data are essential for developing proportionate judicial-pardon criteria in Indonesia’s evolving digital-defamation landscape.
References
Agustina, R. A., Madjid, A., & Noedajasakti, S. (2023). Freedom of expression in regulating criminal acts of defamation against the government and state institutions. Path of Science, 9(8), 1008–1018. https://doi.org/10.22178/pos.95-31
Aisy, R. (2025). Judicial pardon as a humanizing approach to criminal sentencing: Reconstructing judicial decisions under the new Indonesian Criminal Code. The Digest Journal of Jurisprudence and Legisprudence, 6(2), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.15294/digest.v6i2.37174
Aji, M. K. B., Istiqomah, M., Astiti, S. H., & Taqwa, F. A. (2025). The potential disparity in judicial pardon decisions. Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan, 14(1), 63–90. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.14.1.2025.63-90
Alforova, T. M., Koba, M. M., Lehka, O. V., & Kuchuk, A. (2022). Right to freedom of expression v. reputation protection (based on ECtHR practice materials). The Age of Human Rights Journal, 18, 311–330. https://doi.org/10.17561/tahrj.v18.6527
Alves, A. de M. (2016). Online content control, memory and community isolation. In Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks (pp. 83–106). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50456-2_5
Anwar, A., Suhartono, S., Mangesti, Y. A., & Setyorini, E. H. (2025). The concept of judge’s forgiveness (rechterlijk pardon) in the National Criminal Law Code. DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 183–208. https://doi.org/10.30996/dih.v0i0.12674
Aries, A. (2022). Judicial pardon as perfection of the implementation of legality principle in sentencing. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 11(1), 351–357. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i1.1670
Armansyah, A. (2025). Judicial pardon and restorative justice: Towards corrective sentencing in the Indonesian criminal law system. Kosmik Hukum, 25(3), 643–651. https://doi.org/10.30595/kosmikhukum.v25i3.28358
Cañizález, A., Hernández, L., & Torrealba, L. (2020). Disinformation as a society-wide threat: Journalism and “fakecracy” in Venezuela. In IntechOpen eBooks. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93995
Chariansyah, H. (2025). Juridical implications of Constitutional Court Decision Number 105/PUU-XXII/2024 regarding freedom of expression in the digital space. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(1), 562–579. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i1.498
Clemons, E. K., Savin, A., Schreieck, M., Teilmann-Lock, S., Trzaskowski, J., & Waran, R. V. (2024). A face of one’s own: The role of an online personae in a digital age and the right to control one’s own online personae in the presence of digital hacking. Electronic Markets, 34(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-024-00713-3
Devi, D., Guntara, D., Abas, M., & Wongchai, A. (2025). Normative analysis of defamation provisions in the Information and Electronic Transactions Law in the perspective of legal certainty. Pena Justisia Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum, 24(2), 8294–8313. https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v24i2.6305
Feka, M., Pujiyono, P., Sularto, R. B., & Pareke, J. (2025). Navigating the legal minefield: The impact of Articles 27A and 27B of Indonesia’s EIT Law on freedom of expression and the path to legal reform. Journal of Law and Legal Reform, 6(1), 265–304. https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v6i1.19116
Ferstman, C. (2024). Conceptualising arbitrary detention: Power, punishment and control. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4859366
Fu, R. (2025). Difficulties and cracking the judicial recognition of “aggravating circumstances” in internet defamation crimes. International Journal of Social Sciences and Public Administration, 7(3), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.62051/ijsspa.v7n3.03
Handayani, E. P., Arifin, Z., & Fernando, Z. J. (2025). Criminal penalties in cyberspace: Between the development of digital democracy and authoritarianism. IJCLS (Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies), 10(1). https://doi.org/10.15294/ijcls.v10i1.19652
Hoskins, Z. (2017). Criminalization and the collateral consequences of conviction. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 12(4), 625–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-017-9449-2
Hoskins, Z. (2023). Collateral legal consequences and criminal sentencing. Repository@Nottingham, 60(2), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.5406/21521123.60.2.02
Iachim, C.-N., & Madularescu, E. (2026). Legal means of protecting human dignity in the digital era. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Bra?ov Series VII: Social Sciences Law, 395–404. https://doi.org/10.31926/but.ssl.2025.18.67.3.43
Jones, R. A. (2024). Defamation, disinformation, and the press function. In Cambridge University Press eBooks (pp. 85–97). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009174411.011
Jurasz, O., & Barker, K. (2021). Sexual violence in the digital age: A criminal law conundrum? German Law Journal, 22(5), 784–799. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.39
Kongres, E., & Kokpan, B. S. (2024). Review apartment by consumer on social media vs criminal charges by developer: Between consumer complaint and defamation. Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan, 13(2), 393–420. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.13.2.2024.393-420
Krzywo?, A. (2021). Summary judicial proceedings as a measure for electoral disinformation: Defining the European standard. German Law Journal, 22(4), 673–688. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2021.23
Kusumo, B. A. (2017). The influence of positivism philosophy on criminal law enforcement in Indonesia. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v6i1.11528
Langvardt, K., Hurwitz, G., Norton, H., Bambauer, J., Bhagwat, A., Carroll, E. C., Lidsky, L., Jones, R. A., Gajda, A., Kadri, T. E., Edelson, L., Volokh, E., Rozenshtein, A. Z., & Matzko, P. (2024). Media and society after technological disruption. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009174411
Lavi, M. (2021). Publish, share, re-tweet, and repeat. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 441. https://doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.54.2.publish
Lavi, M. (2023). Sharing “bad shaming” on social networks. In Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks (pp. 101–127). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800880221.00012
Machowicz, K. (2022). The impact of the quality of information on the use of freedom of expression. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, 31(3), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2022.31.3.189-201
Majid, P. S., & Angraeni, B. S. (2025). Constitutional implications of Constitutional Court Decision No. 105/PUU-XXII/2024 on freedom of expression and defamation in Indonesia. Constitutional Law Review, 117–131. https://doi.org/10.30863/clr.v4i2.5951
Makarim, E., Brata, M., & Arsyafira, N. (2019). Limitation of rights as a manifestation of duties and responsibilities pertaining to the freedom expression in digital communications. Indonesia Law Review, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v9n3.586
Mashdurohatun, A., Sugihartono, B., Masrifah, N., Adhi, A. I. K., & Glaser, H. (2025). Combating digital defamation: Regulations, challenges and protecting reputation. Journal of Sustainable Development and Regulatory Issues, 3(3), 486–514. https://doi.org/10.53955/jsderi.v3i3.147
Mubarak, H., Purnomo, A., & Imawan, R. (2026). Reconstruction of legal protection for public institutions in the ITE Law after the Constitutional Court Decision 105/PUU-XXII/2024. Journal of Law Administration and Social Science, 6(1), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.54957/jolas.v6i1.1996
Ningtias, A. D., Nahdliyah, H., & Shofa, A. (2025). Judicial pardon as an alternative to a judge’s decision. Jurnal Independent, 13(1), 22–34. https://doi.org/10.30736/ji.v13i1.365
Novak, A. (2016). Transparency and comparative executive clemency: Global lessons for pardon reform in the United States. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 817. https://doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.49.4.transparency
Prahassacitta, V., & Candra, L. V. (2024). Ketidakjelasan batas kerugian dari tindak pidana penghinaan. Justitia et Pax, 40(2), 427–455. https://doi.org/10.24002/jep.v40i2.9665
Rowbottom, J. (2017). Crime and communication: Do legal controls leave enough space for freedom of expression? In Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785364518.00016
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 I Nyoman Budiana, Putu Sawitri Nandari
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)
The author can hold the copyright without any restriction under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)
