Indonesia's Draft Bill on Internet Regulation Criticized

Jakarta Globe, Ismira Lutfia

The Ministry of Communication and Information Technology says it will accommodate feedback on a proposal to monitor online content, as long as it has “clear justifications.” (AFP Photo)

News media, bloggers and other members of the online community were united on Wednesday in voicing objections to a Ministry of Communication and Information Technology draft regulation to create a team to monitor online content.

The Indonesian Internet Service Providers, the Alliance of Independent Journalists, noted bloggers and a news portal all agreed that incorrect perceptions about the Internet are behind the flaws in the draft, which stresses controlling illegal content without addressing the development of positive content.

Karaniya Dharmasaputra, editor-in-chief of news portal Vivanews.com, said in a joint news conference that the draft regulation is “a setback from the spirit of the reform era that upholds the freedom of expression.” He warned that the plan might prevent the growth of the Internet in the country.

“This is contrary to other countries, which support the growth of the Internet by giving out incentives,” he said.

Valens Riyadi from Indonesian Internet Service Providers, or APJII, said: “We do not reject the idea of healthy Internet use but we reject the repressive way of regulating it as drafted in the regulation. We have the impression that the draft will give the authority for Internet service providers to intercept, so does this mean we can intercept ministers’ e-mails?”

Valens added that Internet users can always opt for filtered access if they see the need.

Margiyono, secretary general of the Alliance of Independent Journalists, or AJI, acknowledged that most countries police the Internet to weed out content deemed harmful.

“The government must choose which approach it wants to emulate, and it depends on the government’s political will,” Margiyono said.

He doubted that the model used in the draft would be effective in making the digital sphere safer for users and claimed that “there might be a political motive behind it.” Valens said that if the government is taking the example of China, it is not applicable because “unlike China, the Internet infrastructure here is owned by the private sector.”

Noted Kompasiana.com blogger Pepy Nugroho said the government’s draft policy would not be applicable to filter Web sites that are user-generated.

Meanwhile, ICT Watch, a nongovernmental organization working for a healthy and secure Internet, said in a statement that it understands the draft was made with “good intentions to protect the public from negative content on the Internet and to provide the basis of legal certainty for Internet service providers if there were content determined as illegal disseminated through the providers’ infrastructure.”

However, it said the draft tended to “control, regulate and sanction” Web content with a “top-down” approach.

“It is better for the government to use its resources to boost grassroots activities in developing the quality and quantity of positive local content,” it said.

Ministry spokesman Gatot Dewa Broto said the ministry would accommodate feedback on the draft regulation “as long as it has clear justifications.”