The proposed Anti-Disinformation and Foreign Propaganda Bill by President Prabowo Subianto is unnecessary, as existing legislation is adequate to combat disinformation. Critics argue that the bill, which is perceived as a means to suppress free speech, stems from Prabowo’s inability to distinguish between valid criticism and disinformation. This perspective labels dissenters as “foreign stooges,” highlighting a potential paranoia that raises questions about whether the bill serves the public interest or just Prabowo’s interests.
Other countries have implemented disinformation laws that focus on offenders rather than content regulation. In contrast, Indonesia lacks strong leadership and a stable economy, making a new law likely a tool for governmental suppression rather than effective disinformation management. The definitions of disinformation and propaganda are subjective, enabling flexible interpretations that could lead to unjust prosecutions.
Instead of drafting this bill, promoting digital literacy and fostering open information flow are suggested as more effective solutions to combat disinformation. This approach lays emphasis on empowering the public and improving their ability to discern misinformation, making the bill unnecessary.
