Against Perppu Ormas, Blocking Sites and Censorship

Ario Tamat
Jul 21, 2017 · 3 min read

Teh internetz was abuzz with the news that Telegram would be blocked in Indonesia, due to “terrorism-related content”. The government claims to have requested Telegram to take down those channels and Telegram did not respond. Long story short, websites related to Telegram have been blocked, but usage of the mobile and desktop apps remain (for now). Telegram has also reiterated their efforts to shut down ISIS-related channels. Telegram users in Indonesia however, are mostly waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Telegram joins many, many other online sites and services that have been blocked — Reddit and Vimeo, to name a few, and not mentioning porn and porn-related sites — while the government insists that it is doing it for the common good.

While I am not questioning their good intent, I am questioning it resorting to censorship. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and censorship is prone to abuse, skirting the line between safeguarding offensive content, and silencing free speech.

Another issue about censorship — in the 2014 Copyright Law, there are clauses that state that the government can shut down sites accused of copyright fraud upon reports from the public, which can be done without legal due process, where the accused has time to defend themselves. This is also prone to abuse.

Meanwhile, a new law being drafted in DPR aims to do what some have said is needed to regulate the many non-political organizations in the country, notably those who notoriously upend society with violence, with certain doctrines, or simply as (allegedly) paid thugs. Most recently notable is the government’s push to disband Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia due to their alleged efforts to overthrow the government and install a different political system altogether.

While I might not agree with HTI’s mission and intent, they should have the right to speak this. Intent is not, and should not be a crime, as it is only part of what makes a crime. Installing an overreaching law that threatens organizations of disbandment and banning when they supposedly go against the nation’s principles also toes a fine line between safeguarding unwanted influences to the nation’s stability, and silencing dissenting groups. If HTI is at fault, by all means, yes, prove the crime and disband them based on that. But disbanding non-political organizations should be based on crimes proven in court, and not on the whim of the season of the current sitting government.

Whether or not we trust the government, laws are in place to protect everyone, even people we don’t agree with. Clear lines should demand what kind of proof is needed for alleged crimes, and only then should such disbandment be considered. If we pick on everybody who doesn’t agree with us, who’s to say we won’t be next?

We MUST reject these good-intentioned actions by the government to do censorship, as the pendulum can swing both ways. Censorship is not the all-encompasing answer — the people also need to be educated. Or else, at some point we will be facing a police state where we can know what we are allowed to know, without accountability and without the further progress of society in mind — just the goverment’s.

)
Ario Tamat

Written by

On a quest for the next spicy food experience, while working on @wooz_in and @OhdioFM in my spare time. May sometimes dance in private.