@phdthesis{digilib77954,
           month = {August},
           title = {PERLINDUNGAN HAK KONSTITUSIONAL ATAS KEBEBASAN BEREKSPRESI MELALUI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 105/PUU-XXII/2024},
          school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA},
          author = {NIM.: 22103070107 Danisa Rifky Aura Putri},
            year = {2026},
            note = {Proborini Hastuti S.H., M.H.},
        keywords = {Hak Konstitusional, Kebebasan Berekspresi, Putusan MK 105/PUUXXII/
2024, UU ITE, Maqashid Syariah},
             url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/77954/},
        abstract = {Freedom of expression is a constitutional right guaranteed by Articles 28E
and 28F of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, yet in practice it
frequently conflicts with the provisions of the Electronic Information and
Transactions Law (ITE Law), particularly the multi-interpretable defamation
articles. The ambiguity of the phrase "other persons" in Article 27A of the ITE Law
opens a loophole for public institutions, local governments, corporations, and
officials to criminalize citizens who voice criticism. Constitutional Court Decision
Number 105/PUU-XXII/2024 provides a constitutional interpretation that limits the
scope of that phrase to individual persons only. This study aims to analyze the
protection afforded by that decision to the constitutional right to freedom of
expression in Indonesia.
This research is normative legal research of a descriptive-evaluative
nature, employing a case approach and a statute approach. Data are drawn from
primary legal materials, namely the 1945 Constitution, the ITE Law, and
Constitutional Court Decision Number 105/PUU-XXII/2024, as well as secondary
legal materials in the form of books, journals, and related research findings, which
are analyzed normatively.
The research results show that the decision strengthens the protection of
freedom of expression by narrowing the meaning of "other persons" in Article 27A
in conjunction with Article 45 paragraph (4) of the ITE Law so that it covers only
individual persons. This decision is consistent with Article 19 of the ICCPR and the
ITE Law. Viewed from the perspective of maqashid sharia, this decision aligns with
hifz al-'aql (protection of the intellect) through the expansion of space for criticism
of public institutions, and with hifz al-nafs (protection of the self/life) through the
continued protection of individual victims, thereby achieving a balance between the
public interest and individual interest.}
}