Analysis of Hate Speech in the Perspective of Changes to the Electronic Information and Transaction Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v18no1.3146Abstract
This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of hate speech rules concerning changes in electronic transaction information policies. It further used normative legal study which included the process of identifying legal rules, principles, and doctrines to address the constitutional issues. The results showed that the amendments from the 2008 ITE Law to the 2016 ITE Law did not adequately the basic problems. Furthermore, certain forms of hate speech rules were observed in the ITE Law, particularly in Article 27 paragraph (3) and Article 28 paragraph (2). These rules were unclear benchmarks used in assessing social media posts as hate speech, defamation, or criticism and opinion from an individual about a problem. Therefore, making improvements through legal reform was essential to ITE Law, specifically Article 27 paragraph (3) and Article 28 paragraph (2). The amendments were necessary to develop good legal certainty for the community. The government should further make legal comparisons with other countries to identify the best regulatory framework for the community.
Keywords:
Hate Speech, Law Reform, PerspectiveDownloads
Total Abstract Views: 231 |
Total Downloads: 187
References
Abdu Mukthie Fajar. Hukum Konstitusi Dan MahkamahKonstitusi. Jakarta: Konstitusi Press, 2006.
Atmasasmita, Romli. Perbandingan Hukum Pidana. Bandung: Mandar Maju, 2000.
Attamimi, A. Hamid S. Proses Pembuatan Perundang-Undangan Ditinjau Dari Aspek Filsafat, Materi Kursus Penyegaran Perancangan Perundang-Undangan. Semarang, 1990.
Ahmad Faizal Azhar, Eko Soponyono. “Kebijakan Hukum Pidana Dalam Pengaturan Dan Penanggulangan Ujaran Kebencian(Hate Speech)Di Media Sosial.” Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia 2, no. 275–284 (2020). https://ejournal2.undip.ac.id/index.php/jphi/article/view/8470/4442.
Ali, Mahrus. “Sistem Peradilan Pidana Progresif; Alternatif Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana.” IUS QUAI IUSTUM 14, no. 2 (2007). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol14.iss2.art2.
Atikah Mardhiya Rohmy, Teguh Suratman, Arini Indah Nihayaty. “UU ITE Dalam Perspektif Perkembangan Teknologi Informasi Dan Komunikasi.” Dakwatuna 7, no. 2 (2021). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.54471/dakwatuna.v7i2.1202.
Budi Suharyanto. Tindak Pidana Teknologi Informasi Urgensi Dan Pengaturan Celah Hukumnya. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada, 2012.
Dian Junita Ningrum, Suryadi, dan Dian Eka Chandra Wardhana. “Kajian Ujaran Kebencian Di Media Sosial.” Urnal IlmiahKorpus 2, no. 3 (2018): 241–52. https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/korpus/article/view/6779/3378.
Dimyati, Khudzaifah. “Pola Pemikiran Hukum Responsif: Sebuah Studi Atas Proses Pembangunan Ilmu Hukum Indonesia.” UMS Publikasi Ilmiah 10, no. 1 (2007). https://publikasiilmiah.ums.ac.id/xmlui/handle/11617/740.
Dita Kusumasaridan S. Arifianto. “Makna Teks Ujaran Kebencian Pada Media Sosial.” Jurnal Komunikasi 12, no. 1 (2020): 1–15. https://journal.untar.ac.id/index.php/komunikasi/article/view/4045/4661.
H. Dahlan Thaib, et.al. Teori Dan Hukum Konsitusi. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada, 2005.
Hamzah, Andi. KUHP Dan KUHAP-Edisi Revisi. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta, 2008.
Huda, Chairul. Dari Tiada Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan Menuju Kepada Tiada Pertanggunjawaban Pidan Tanpa Kesalahan. Jakarta: Kencana, 2011.
I Made Kardiyasa, A.A Sagung Laksmi Dewi dan Ni Made Sukaryati Karma. “Sanksi Pidana Terhadap Ujaran Kebencian (Hate Speech).” Jurnal Analogi Hukum 2, no. 1 (2020): 78–82. https://www.ejournal.warmadewa.ac.id/index.php/analogihukum/article/view/1627.
Jurnal, Datin L A W, Defril Hidayat, Institut Agama, Islam Negeri, and Iain Kerinci. “Hukum Sebagai Sarana Pembaharuan Dalam Masyarakat ( Law as a Tool of Social Engineering ),” 2021. https://ojs.umb-bungo.ac.id/index.php/DATIN/article/view/566.
“Kebijakan Formulasi Hukum Pidana Tentang Penanggulangan Tindak Pidana Penyebaran Ujaran Kebencian (Hate Speech) Di Indonesia.” Fakultas Hukum Universsitas Diponegoro, n.d.
Krtodihardjo, Soewargo. Asas-Asas Hukum Tata Negara. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gajah Mada, 1983.
L, Bernard. “Judical Review Dan Arah Politik Hukum.” In Makalh Untuk Seminar Judical Review Dan Arah Politik Hukum Di Fakultas Ilmu Sosial Universitas Negeri Semarang, 2006.
M Choirul Anam. “Surat Edaran Kapolri Tentang Penanganan Ujaran Kebencian (Hate Speech) Dalam Kerangka Hak Asasi Manusia” 1 No 3 (2015): 16.
Mangantibe, Veisy. “Ujaran Kebencian Dalam Surat Edaran Kapolri Nomor: SE/6/X/2015 Tentang Penangananucapan Kebencian (Hate Speech).” Lex Crimen V, no. 1 (2016): 159–62. https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/v3/index.php/lexcrimen/article/view/10614/10201.
Mawarti, Sri. “Fenomena Hate Speech Dampak Ujaran Kebencian.” Toleransi: Media Komunikasi Umat Beragama 10, no. 1 (2018): 83–95. https://ejournal.uin-suska.ac.id/index.php/toleransi/article/view/5722.
Ngani, Nico. Sinerama Hukum Pidana. Liberty, 1984.
Rahmawati, Nur, and M Marizal Muslichatun, Muslichatun. “Kebebasan Berpendapat Terhadap Pemerintah Melalui Media Sosial Dalam Perspektif UU ITE.” WIDYA PRANATA HUKUM 3, no. 1 (2021). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.37631/widyapranata.v3i1.270.
Riant D Nugroho. Kebijakan Publik, Formulasi, Implementasi Dan Evaluasi. Jakarta: Elex Media Komputindo, 2003.
Siswanto Sunarso. Hukum Informasi Dan Transaksi Elektronik Studi Kasus Prita Mulyasari. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta, n.d.
Warrasih, Esmi. Pranata Hukum Sebuah Telaah Sosiologis. Semarang: PT Suryan Andaru Utama, 2005.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2024 the Auhtor(s) Published by Development Centre Research of Law and Scientific Publication on behalf of the Faculty of Law, Universitas Lampung.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
