I

ndonesia made a step forward in its democracy when in 2006 the Constitutional Court annulled clauses in the Criminal Code on defamation of the president and vice president '€” while many other countries, not only monarchies, have retained the threat of punishment for such lèse-majesté crimes. The court under Jimly Asshiddiqie at the time ruled that such clauses, part of the Criminal Code inherited from Dutch colonial times, violated constitutional freedoms including the right to seek information, apart from breaching equality before the law.

The plaintiff Eggi Sudjana, a lawyer and politician, had, among other reasons, referred to his right under the Anticorruption Law to seek clarification about reports of corruption within the State Palace, for which he was later sentenced to three months'€™ imprisonment for defaming then president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, regardless of the plaintiff'€™s victory at the Constitutional Court. The court stated that the clauses were too vague in defining what constituted insulting the president and vice president.

Rulings of the Constitutional Court are final and binding; nevertheless reported statements such as that of Vice President Jusuf Kalla saying it would be '€œnatural'€ if the government proposed reinserting defamation of the president and vice president into the revised Criminal Code are disturbing. Such discourse should be ancient history.

The Criminal Code and the Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE) Law have provisions for any citizen who feels he or she has been defamed. Many citizens have been found guilty of defamation under the 2008 ITE Law, raising questions about the limits of defining defamation when updating one'€™s status on a social media account carries the risk of six years'€™ imprisonment and a fine of Rp 1 billion (US$74,211).

Public figures assess their risk of becoming direct targets of adulation or taunts before deciding to join the bandwagon of direct accessibility. Former first lady Ani Yudhoyono provided a good example of a public figure engaging with the masses through her Twitter, Facebook and Instagram accounts, barking at comments she found ridiculous, then apologizing and uploading pictures and comments again. No one felt threatened with the axe of lèse-majesté when remarking on her account. She came across as merely being human when she was offended, without appearing to seek further redress.

The mere report that the administration of President Joko '€œJokowi'€ Widodo is throwing about ideas of reinserting the crime of defaming the head of state is further damaging to the government'€™s credibility. Even without clauses about defaming the president and the vice president, all citizens including public officials and the President still have recourse to the relevant clauses under the Criminal Code and the ITE Law. The difference would be that the police would not be allowed to arbitrarily arrest citizens who are believed to have intentionally insulted the president or vice president.

It may be normal for countries to step back and forward in their democracies. But citizens would prefer that their leaders refrained from wasting precious time and rather that they focused on their urgent, vast volume of work in hand.