"So far, I've been pretty calm. Though I'm also rather nervous. I think this is normal, since it's the first time I've dealt with the law. But I try to face it with joy," Stella told The Jakarta Post on April 20.

Stella was reported to the police on allegations of violating the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, a controversial law that critics say makes any criticism communicated online liable for defamation. Stella was summoned after she uploaded a series of Instagram Stories on May 2020 recounting a  negative experience she had at a beauty clinic in December 2019.

Angry clinic

In the initial post, Stella posted complaints about going to a clinic for acne issues and ending up with highly inflamed skin. She did this without mentioning a specific clinic, aiming to simply engage with her friends and followers. She then reposted some of the responses, along with photos of her face, showing her clearly irritated skin.

"Though I did upload it to my Instastory, I didn't even mention the name of the clinic or the doctor. I meant to simply share information with other women [who might be interested in their treatment]. Isn't that just normal? Moreover, I also paid the clinic a lot so I might [have recovered eventually],” explained Stella.

One of the doctors from the clinic saw the post and felt that it would risk damaging the clinic’s credibility. By Jan. 11, a court summon arrived at Stella’s home. "I was in a panic. So I immediately tried to find out who reported my account. I found the doctor's Instagram account, and I asked carefully. She replied 'Yes, we, the team of doctors, were offended by your post. That's why we communicated the matters with our lawyers,'" recounts Stella.

Stella tried to resolve the issue with a personal apology but the clinic rejected Stella and her family's apology and was persistent in settling the matter in court.

After that, Stella still tried to apologize through her Instagram account. She tagged the Instagram accounts of the clinic and the doctor who first reported her, inadvertently publicizing their names. “But one of the doctors asked me to take down my post,” she said.

Stella Monica uploaded an Instastory to her Instagram account talking about her experience with a beauty clinic. Within two weeks, she was summoned to court and asked to issue a public apology. (JP/Courtesy of Stella Monica)

The clinic said it wanted to revoke the letter but under a condition which Stella and her family thought was absurd. They requested that Stella publish a half-page apology in a national newspaper for three consecutive days. Not that she didn't want to, but Stella said that it would be impossible to afford.

"I would have to prepare more than Rp 700 million. I just graduated from college. I can't afford to pay that much,” said Stella.

Major breakout

Stella had undergone a seven-month treatment at a clinic, where she received a face peeling treatment, acne photodynamic therapy, various medicine and facial cream that was to be used regularly. With no improvement, Stella moved on to other clinics.

Two days after she halted the use of the clinic’s prescriptions, Stella began experiencing a high level of acne inflammation. Reporting her complaints to the clinic's customer service, Stella was instead accused of not using the medicine regularly. She decided to visit another doctor who told her that her skin was experiencing addiction withdrawals.

Fortunately, Stella is not alone. She is supported by the Consumer Defenders Community Coalition (Kompak).

Kompak spokesperson Anindya Shabrina Joediono told the Post that Stella's posts were not defamatory. She only uploaded snippets of conversations with former clinic customers and other clinic doctors' sympathetic words regarding her skin condition.

"Kompak demands the presence of the state in this case. Supposedly, consumers like Stella cannot be criminalized and the case should be halted," explained Anindya.

She also stated that the clinic had made a peace offering, stating that it wanted to pay for the cost of publishing Stella Monica's apology in the newspaper. However, Anindya cautions against Stella accepting the peace offering, as it still positions her as the guilty party. Anindya said the clinic should instead apologize to Stella.

"The publication of Stella's apology in the newspaper has the potential to incriminate her in court. Because [it means Stella admitting] that she was wrong. There's also nothing to apologize for. The clinic should apologize for criminalizing its consumers," added Anindya.

Kompak and the community held a demonstration in front of the clinic on April 21. They demanded that the clinic stop criminalizing its consumers and immediately withdraw all lawsuits against Stella Monica.

Vulnerable consumers

According to M. Arsyad, the coordinator of SAFEnet, an organization that aims to  defend digital rights in Southeast Asia, three parties often take advantage of the “elasticity” of the ITE Law to silence their opponents. The first are public officials, then law enforcement personnel and investors. Judging from Stella’s case, Arsyad classifies the reporting party as an investor.

"If this elastic clause is not immediately revised, it will rob consumers of the courage to voice their opinions. The reporting party considers this shock therapy for the public and intends to use it to frighten consumers who want to comment about their business," Arsyad told the Post.

He points to the story of 47-year-old Napisah from Surabaya who was dragged to court after publishing a Facebook post to express her disappointment with a local community working on mental health issues.

Napisah’s disappointment stemmed from a session with one of the counselors, who she alleged shared her story with other counselors in the community without her consent.

“She doesn't accept that her personal life story is being spread publicly by a party who should be responsible for keeping secrets. She put up a status post on Facebook, the community [saw it], and reported her to the authority [under ITE Law]," said Arsyad.

According to Arsyad, the only way to prevent similar incidents like that experienced by Stella and Napisah from occurring is to remove the “elastic” clauses from the ITE Law, which are often used to suppress public opinion.

For those who caught up in it, however, personal resolution is the goal. Stella’s next court hearing is May 5, and with her team feeling like it has public support on her side, she just wants to get things over with.

"Frankly, I want this problem to be resolved peacefully," she said.