Penal Policy on Digital Defamation: A Comparative Study of Indonesian and Malaysian Law

Hartanto, Hartanto; Syakdiah, Syakdiah; Astuti, Dwi; Daniil Alimpeev

doi:10.15294/ijcls.v11i1.34130

Akses terbuka Jurnal

Penal Policy on Digital Defamation: A Comparative Study of Indonesian and Malaysian Law

IJCLS (Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies) · Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026) · hlm. 621–652

DOI: 10.15294/ijcls.v11i1.34130
ISSN: 2548-1576, 2548-1568
Terbit: 2026-06-10
Penerbit: Universitas Negeri Semarang
Bahasa: eng
Lisensi: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

Abstrak

The expansion of criminal defamation in digital space, particularly under Indonesia’s ITE Law, has raised concerns over disproportionate restrictions on freedom of expression compared to neighboring jurisdictions such as Malaysia. This study aims to examine how Indonesia and Malaysia regulate criminal defamation and to identify key differences in their penal policies. The central issue is whether reliance on criminal law as a primary regulatory instrument leads to disproportionate interference with freedom of expression in both jurisdictions. This research employs a normative juridical method with a comparative law approach, analyzing Article 27A of Law No. 1 of 2024 (ITE Law), the new Indonesian Criminal Code, and Sections 499–502 of the Malaysian Penal Code, complemented by the Defamation Act 1957 and Constitutional Court Decision No. 105/PUU-XXII/2024. The findings indicate three principal differences. Indonesia maintains a broader scope of criminalization with imprisonment as a dominant sanction, whereas Malaysia tends to prioritize civil remedies. Malaysia also demonstrates more developed defenses grounded in public interest. At the same time, Indonesia’s approach remains less structured in distinguishing legitimate criticism from defamation and in translating principles of reputation protection into proportional legal standards. The study concludes that Indonesia’s current framework risks over-criminalization and requires reform to ensure proportionality. Criminal sanctions should be applied as a last resort (ultimum remedium), supported by mandatory mediation and clearer normative boundaries.

Kata kunci

Jaringan kolaborasi para penulis

9 penulis · 14 tautan kepenulisan bersama · 4 lintas organisasi

Arahkan kursor atau ketuk sebuah nama untuk menyorot rekan penulisnya. Klik dua kali untuk membuka halaman penulis.

Universitas Widya Mataram Yogyakarta
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia
Afiliasi tidak diketahui

Organisasi berbeda
Organisasi sama
Afiliasi tidak diketahui
Garis lebih tebal = lebih banyak artikel bersama · lingkaran lebih besar = lebih banyak artikel

Tampilkan sebagai tabel

Rekan penulis	Organisasi	Artikel bersama
Nidya Tajsgoani	Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia	1
Dianawati Lega	Universitas Widya Mataram Yogyakarta	1
Bhenu SE Artha	Afiliasi tidak diketahui	1
Erna Tri Rusmala Ratnawati	Afiliasi tidak diketahui	1
Nany Noor Kurniyati	Afiliasi tidak diketahui	1

Afiliasi berasal dari OpenAlex; metadata OAI-PMH jurnal tidak memuatnya. Penulis tanpa ID OpenAlex dicocokkan berdasarkan nama, sehingga dua orang bisa tergabung atau satu orang bisa terpisah.

Sumber metadata: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijcls/oai, pertama di-harvest 5 Nov 2026, terakhir terlihat 8 Nov 2026.

Metadata asli (oai_dc)

<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en">Penal Policy on Digital Defamation: A Comparative Study of Indonesian and Malaysian Law</dc:title>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Hartanto, Hartanto</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Syakdiah, Syakdiah</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Astuti , Dwi</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Daniil Alimpeev</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Penal Policy</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Cyber Defamation</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Freedom of Expression</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">IT Law</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Comparative Criminal Law</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en">The expansion of criminal defamation in digital space, particularly under Indonesia’s ITE Law, has raised concerns over disproportionate restrictions on freedom of expression compared to neighboring jurisdictions such as Malaysia. This study aims to examine how Indonesia and Malaysia regulate criminal defamation and to identify key differences in their penal policies. The central issue is whether reliance on criminal law as a primary regulatory instrument leads to disproportionate interference with freedom of expression in both jurisdictions. This research employs a normative juridical method with a comparative law approach, analyzing Article 27A of Law No. 1 of 2024 (ITE Law), the new Indonesian Criminal Code, and Sections 499–502 of the Malaysian Penal Code, complemented by the Defamation Act 1957 and Constitutional Court Decision No. 105/PUU-XXII/2024. The findings indicate three principal differences. Indonesia maintains a broader scope of criminalization with imprisonment as a dominant sanction, whereas Malaysia tends to prioritize civil remedies. Malaysia also demonstrates more developed defenses grounded in public interest. At the same time, Indonesia’s approach remains less structured in distinguishing legitimate criticism from defamation and in translating principles of reputation protection into proportional legal standards. The study concludes that Indonesia’s current framework risks over-criminalization and requires reform to ensure proportionality. Criminal sanctions should be applied as a last resort (ultimum remedium), supported by mandatory mediation and clearer normative boundaries.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2026-06-10</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijcls/article/view/34130</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.15294/ijcls.v11i1.34130</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en">IJCLS (Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies); Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): Indonesia J. Crim. L. Studies (May, 2026); 621-652</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2548-1576</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2548-1568</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.15294/ijcls.v11i1</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijcls/article/view/34130/10023</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">Copyright (c) 2026 Hartanto Hartanto, Syakdiah Syakdiah, Dwi Astuti , Daniil Alimpeev (Author)</dc:rights>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>