English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

ABSTRAKPasal penghinaan dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik sebagaimana telah diamandemen dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 merupakan pasal yang sering menimbulkan perdebatan. Penulis mengkaji putusan-putusan pengadilan periode tahun 2010-2016, dan menemukan rumusan masalah bagaimana disparitas penerapan pasal penghinaan dalam Pasal 27 ayat (3) jo. Pasal 45 Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik, dan pada aspek perlindungan terhadap kebebasan berekspresi? Penelitian menggunakan metode penelitian normatif dengan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan kasus dilakukan untuk memperoleh jawaban. Analisis terhadap dua belas putusan pengadilan yang telah berkekuatan hukum tetap pada periode tahun 2010 sampai dengan 2016 diperoleh dua kesimpulan. Pertama, terjadi disparitas dalam penerapan Pasal 27 ayat (3) jo. Pasal 45 tersebut karena adanya disparitas ketika hakim menginterpretasikan unsur-unsur pasal tersebut. Kedua, terjadi disparitas dalam perlindungan kebebasan berekspresi akibat adanya disparitas tersebut, bahkan penerapan pasal tindak pidana penghinaan tersebut cenderung mengancam kebebasan berekspresi.Kata kunci: tindak pidana, penghinaan, kebebasan berekspresi. ABSTRACT Article of defamation in Law Number 11 of 2008 on Information and Electronic Transactions as amended by Law Number 19 of 2016 is every so often debated. This analysis examines court decisions around the period 2010-2016 with the formulation of the problem of how inconsistent the application of the defamation article in Article 27 paragraph (3) juncto Article 45 of Information and Electronic Transactions Law, along with the aspect of freedom of expression protection. This study uses normative research methods with law and cases approach to obtain answers. Out from analyzing twelve court decisions with have permanent legal force from 2010 to 2016, two conclusions are obtained. First, there is disparity in the application of Article 27 paragraph (3) in conjunction with Article 45 because of the disparity when the judge interprets the elements of the article. Second, there is disparity in the protection of freedom of expression due to the difference; even the application of the criminal offense article tends to threaten freedom of expression. The contradiction must be between the decisions of the same court, or at the same level. Keywords: criminal act, defamation, freedom of expression.

DISPARITAS PERLINDUNGAN KEBEBASAN BEREKSPRESI DALAM PENERAPAN PASAL PENGHINAAN UNDANG-UNDANG INFORMASI DAN TRANSAKSI ELEKTRONIK