REFORMULASI KEBIJAKAN HUKUM PIDANA TERHADAP UJARAN KEBENCIAN DI MEDIA SOSIAL : STUDI KOMPARATIF ANTARA KUHP DAN UU ITE

Abstract

This research analyzes the regulatory challenges of hate speech in Indonesia through a comparative study between the Criminal Code and Electronic Information and Transaction Law, and their implications for protecting freedom of expression. Using a normative juridical method with a legal comparison approach, this study identifies regulatory fragmentation, unclear definitive parameters, and implementation inconsistencies that potentially create legal uncertainty. The findings reveal that the Criminal Code applies a conventional perspective based on public order protection, while the Electronic Information and Transaction Law tends to focus on protecting certain identity groups but with ambiguous formulations. The implementation of both legal instruments shows a pattern of selectivity that potentially distorts the democratic function of freedom of expression. The research recommends a comprehensive policy reformulation including: operational definitions based on Rabat Plan of Action parameters, a tiered approach in handling cases, harmonization between legal instruments, integration of digital platform roles, strengthening law enforcement capacity, and enhancing public digital literacy. The ideal model of hate speech criminalization policy must balance the interests of protecting vulnerable groups with guarantees of freedom of expression, considering Indonesia's multicultural context and international standards for legitimate restrictions on freedom of expression.