Ronny Ronny

Analisis Pengaturan Pasal berkaitan Hoaks dalam Undang-Undang No. 19 Tahun 2016

Introduction

Analisis pengaturan pasal berkaitan hoaks dalam undang-undang no. 19 tahun 2016. Analisis mendalam pengaturan hoaks dalam Undang-Undang No. 19 Tahun 2016 (UU ITE). Pahami pasal-pasal pidana terkait penyebaran berita bohong dan dampaknya.

Abstract

Hoaks atau Hoax adalah informasi atau berita bohong yang dapat menimbulkan akibat yang mempengaruhi dan dipercayai oleh orang yang mengakses atau melihat informasi atau berita bohong tersebut. Pengaturan pasal perbuatan dilarang dalam UU ITE termasuk larangan penyebaran informasi bohong. Ada 4 pasal dalam UU ITE yang diterapkan untuk pelaku yang menyebarkan berita bohong. hoaks, yakni pasal pencemaran  nama baik dengan Pasal 27 ayat (3) UU ITE, pasal  perbuatan menyebarkan informasi yang ditujukan untuk menimbulkan kebencian atau permusuhan berdasarkan SARA dengan Pasal 28 ayat (1) UU ITE,  pasal  perbuatan penyebaran berita bohong dan menyesatkan yang merugikan konsumen dalam transaksi elektronik dengan Pasal 28 ayat (2) UU ITE, dan Pasal perbuatan untuk merekayasa informasi sehingga tercipa infomasi bohong yang seolah-olah dianggap asli dengan Pasal 35 UU ITE.

Review

This paper, titled "Analisis Pengaturan Pasal berkaitan Hoaks dalam Undang-Undang No. 19 Tahun 2016," addresses a highly relevant and pressing issue: the legal regulation of hoaxes within the Indonesian context. The abstract effectively defines a hoax as false information causing public belief or impact, immediately establishing the importance of the study. The paper's core objective, as outlined, is to analyze the specific articles within Law No. 19 of 2016 (UU ITE) that can be applied to perpetrators spreading hoaxes. This focus on identifying and mapping the pertinent legal provisions offers a foundational understanding of the current regulatory framework in Indonesia. A significant strength of the abstract lies in its clear and concise identification of four specific articles within the UU ITE that are utilized against the spread of hoaxes. These include Article 27(3) concerning defamation, Article 28(1) targeting information intended to incite hatred or hostility based on SARA (ethnicity, religion, race, and inter-group relations), Article 28(2) addressing misleading and false information detrimental to consumers in electronic transactions, and Article 35 pertaining to information manipulation designed to create false authenticity. This systematic enumeration provides a valuable overview for anyone seeking to understand the legal tools available for combating hoaxes under Indonesian law. While the abstract clearly outlines the identified articles, the title's promise of "analisis pengaturan" (analysis of regulation) suggests a deeper dive beyond mere listing. Future development of the paper could potentially explore the nuances of applying these articles, such as challenges in proof, potential for multiple interpretations, or the actual effectiveness of these provisions in deterring hoax dissemination. Investigating case studies, judicial precedents, or public perception of these regulations would significantly enhance the analytical depth. Nevertheless, the paper's current scope provides a crucial starting point by precisely delineating the legal landscape, offering a valuable resource for legal scholars, practitioners, and policymakers interested in the legislative responses to disinformation in Indonesia.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.