Court hears review of Internet law

The Constitutional Court has asked plaintiffs to revise their argument in the first hearing of a judicial review filed against the 2008 Information and Electronic Transaction (ITE) Law on Tuesday.

Presiding Judge M Arsyad Sanusi gave the plaintiffs two weeks to specify how the contentious article in question violates their constitutional rights.

The petitioners last month filed for a judicial review of Article 31 (4) of the law on lawful interception by law enforcement institutions, which they say contradicts their constitutional rights as advocates. The article mandates a government regulation to conduct a lawful interception.

“If requests for interceptions are regulated by a government regulation, we are afraid that our clients will face a limited complaint mechanism [if they feel the interceptions are against their clients’ rights],” Wahyu Wagiman, a lawyer for the plaintiffs said.

The plaintiffs, Anggara, the director of the Institute of Criminal Justice Reform; Supriyadi Widodo Eddyono, the coordinator of the Indonesia Media Defense Litigation Network; and Wahyudi Djafar, a researcher from the Center for Democracy and Human Rights Studies, said they had received many complaints from their clients on the inappropriate implementation of the law.

"We believe the article on interception violates our constitutional rights to maintain confidentiality with our clients," Anggara said in January.

“Wiretapping by legal authorities or state institutions is controversial because it is an invasion of the privacy of the people. This includes privacy in one’s personal life, family life and correspondence,” plaintiffs argued.

Wahyu said if the government was in charge of regulating interception mechanisms, the public’s aspirations would not be accommodated.

The plaintiffs argued for the interception mechanism to be regulated in a law instead.

“If [the mechanism] was regulated in a law, instead of in a government regulation, then all of the plaintiff’s opinions and suggestions would be better accommodated by the House of Representatives and the public could monitor [interception practices],” Wahyu said.