An Undemocratic Clause
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
The government's move to once again propose the inclusion of the article on defaming the president in the Criminal Code (KUHP) is a step in the wrong direction. The Constitutional Court struck down the articles in 2006 because they contradicted the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression. If the government succeeds in reviving the articles to be part of the new KUHP, it will be like bringing a zombie back to life, as a means of scaring people from offending the president.
The new presidential defamation articles were included in the KUHP bill handed over to leaders of the House of Representatives (DPR) on June 8. Disparaging the president is mentioned in two of the 786 articles comprising the new KUHP. Although it is called the new KUHP, in essence, the new articles are just as offensive as those that were ruled invalid. Take the explanation of what is meant by disparaging the president or vice-president. Draft Article 264 defines insulting as, "exhibiting, writing, playing recordings, whose contents contain insults to the president or vice-president."
arsip tempo : 173169632185.
The government's move to once again propose the inclusion of the article on defaming the president in the Criminal Code (KUHP) is a step in the wrong direction. The Constitutional Court struck down the articles in 2006 because they contradicted the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression. If the government succeeds in reviving the articles to be part of the new KUHP, it will be like bringing a zombie back to life, as a means of scarin
...
Subscribe to continue reading.
We craft news with stories.
For the benefits of subscribing to Digital Tempo, See More
