From Online Speech to Physical Sanctions: Digital–Physical Authoritarianism under Indonesia’s ITE Law

This paper examines the intersection of digital and physical authoritarianism through the criminalization of online expression under Indonesia’s Electronic Information and Transactions Law (Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik, ITE Law). Enacted in 2008 by the Government of Indonesia in conjunction with the House of Representatives, the ITE Law was formally designed to regulate cyber activities, protect individual reputations, and ensure the recognition and respect of human rights in the digital sphere. However, in practice, its implementation—particularly Article 27 paragraph (3) concerning defamation—has generated persistent controversy due to its ambiguous formulation and expansive interpretative scope. The article on defamation in the ITE Law is widely characterized as a “rubber clause,” as it lacks a clear and strict definition of criminal defamation and introduces the term “insult” without explicit reference to a specific provision in the Indonesian Criminal Code. In the Criminal Code itself, defamation is structured as a chapter comprising multiple offenses with distinct elements and gradations, rather than a single, unified criminal act. This legal ambiguity has facilitated selective and strategic enforcement, allowing criminal law—originally intended to address malicious falsehoods in online spaces—to be mobilized against individuals, journalists, researchers, and media organizations for expressions of criticism, investigative reporting, or academic analysis. Drawing on the work on Roberts and Oosterom (2025) that has categorized practices of digital authoritarianism include online censorship, digital surveillance, digital information, dan repressive law, this study argues that authoritarian practices under the ITE Law as an instance of digital authoritarianism. It is not operate through direct state repression of citizens by authoritarian state, but they function through a hybrid mechanism in which digital platforms become entry points for physical legal sanctions, where the enforcement is often initiated not only by state actors but also by government officials, corporate entities, or private individuals against other citizens. This blurring of boundaries between state and non-state actors illustrates how authoritarian control can be diffused and normalized within legal and social relations, transforming interpersonal conflicts and public criticism into criminal matters. Methodologically, this research employs a qualitative case study approach, analyzing several defamation cases prosecuted under the ITE Law that involve journalists, researchers, and ordinary citizens in Indonesia. By tracing legal processes, actor constellations, and outcomes in these cases, the study demonstrates how digital expressions are translated into physical forms of coercion such as arrest, detention, trial, and imprisonment. The findings contribute to broader debates on media freedom, academic freedom, and digital rights globally, and offer critical insights into how ostensibly rights-protective cyber laws can be repurposed to sustain authoritarian governance in both digital and physical domains.