House Commission I, overseeing communication and information, held a series of meetings with the government to amend at least seven articles in the ITE Law that have been legally annulled by the new Criminal Code (KUHP) passed earlier this year.

The articles stipulate provisions regarding defamation, obscenity and hate speech on the internet.

But the meetings took place behind closed doors, barring members of the public and the press from observing the deliberation on several articles deemed problematic.

Politicians in Commission I defended the decision to make the meetings private, citing sensitive issues that might be misinterpreted by the public, such as the discussion of ethnicity when deliberating defamation articles.

“We can’t have in-depth discussions on sensitive things if we make these open meetings,” said House Commission I deputy chairman Abdul Kharis Almasyhari of the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) on Wednesday.

Read also: Lawmakers try to water down draconian provisions in cyberlaw

Another lawmaker, Dave Laksono from the Golkar Party, cited “technicalities” behind the decision to make the meetings closed to the public but did not give further details about any technical issues.

Both Abdul and Dave said the so-called draconian articles often used to criminalize people will be watered down in the law’s latest amendment. The lawmakers had heard input from civil society organizations on the problematic articles, Dave said.

At least 500 people had been reported to the police between 2013 and 2022 for alleged hate speech and defamation under the ITE Law, according to the Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network (SAFEnet). Most of the reports were filed by government officials or people representing an institution.

A coalition of 28 civil society organizations condemned the House Commission I’s move to hold the meetings on the ITE Law amendment behind closed doors, saying that the move violated democratic principles of meaningful participation in the policymaking process.

The Commission held at least two public hearings to hear civil society organizations’ insight into the amendment. It is necessary that the lawmakers hold the follow up meetings publicly to ensure that any input would be accommodated in the limited amendment of the law, the coalition said.

“Lawmakers should be able to be more open in accommodating public input to avoid the formulation of draconian articles,” said Wahyudi Djafar, the executive director of the Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy (Elsam) human rights group.

Read also: ITE Law revision to introduce a restorative justice approach

Every meeting on the amendment should be open for the public as the law is often used to curb free speech and criminalize government critics, including journalists, said Ika Ningtyas of the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI). There were at least 24 journalists reported under the ITE Law between 2017 and 2021, according to SAFEnet.

The initiative to revise the law came from President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, who said in 2021 that the ITE Law and its draconian articles had become a problem, following a series of public protests over the provisions. President Jokowi’s administration later proposed a limited amendment in December of the same year.

But the House only started the deliberation this year as policymakers decided to prioritize the Personal Data Protection Law, which was passed last September.