Solusi Al-Qur’an Terhadap Ujaran Kebencian

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-92
Author(s):  
Moh. Bakir
Keyword(s):  
Hate Speech ◽  
Social Disintegration ◽  
Good Element ◽  
The Law

This article wants to explore the Qur'anic view of the utterances of hate with the approach of the theory of maṣlaḥah Najmuddin al-Ṭufi in the book Risālah fī Ri’āyah al-Maṣlaḥah. The author's findings indicate that the Al-Qur'an as a universal scripture emphasizes the importance of safeguarding actions that have the potential to cause noise, conflict, social disintegration and hurt others, both in the form of speech, attitudes, and actions. While the maṣlaḥah according to imam al-Ṭufi is one whose existence gives rise to harmony and does not cause tyranny or harm to anything and anyone. So provocative actions, such as naming, pitting, hoaxes, spreading hate speech and things that can ignite anger from other parties can be suppressed if both pay attention to common concerns. According to him, legally, if an action is clear, the prohibited argument in the text is like the prohibition of cursing, pitting sheep, utterances of hatred, hoax, adultery, gambling, khamar and so on, then the law is forbidden even though these things have a good element for some people especially the culprit.

scholarly journals The Indonesian Electronic Information and Transactions Within Indonesia’s Broader Legal Regime: Urgency for Amendment?

Jurnal HAM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 533
Author(s):  
Tasya Safiranita ◽  
Travis Tio Pratama Waluyo ◽  
Elizabeth Calista ◽  
Danielle Putri Ratu ◽  
Ahmad M. Ramli
Keyword(s):  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Information Policy ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Electronic Information ◽  
Interdependent Network ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government

Cyberspace is the interdependent network of information technology infrastructures such as the internet, telecommunications networks, and computer systems. Meanwhile, Indonesia’s Law Number 11 of 2008 and its amendment through Indonesian Law Number 19 of 2016 governing cyberspace have been viewed to contradict and infringe other areas of law, such as protection of press or freedom of expression. Hence, this study seeks to identify the controversies and problems regarding the law deemed urgent for amendment. Further, this study creates recommendations so the government may amend electronic information policy more fairly and efficiently. This study uses a judicial normative and comparative approach. This research tries to analyze the existing regulations and the implementation and compare Indonesia’s cyberspace regulation with other States’. This study finds that Articles 27(3) and 28(2) of the law criminalize defamation and hate speech in an overly broad manner and that Article 40(2)(b) allows the government to exercise problematic censorship. As a result, they have infringed the freedom of the press and general freedom of expression in practice. In response to this, this study compares similar provisions from other States and recommends amendment the articles to become narrower and more clearly defined.

scholarly journals Extreme Speech, Democratic Deliberation, and Social Media

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey W. Howard
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Alternative Mechanism ◽  
Democratic Deliberation ◽  
Media Companies ◽  
Moral Responsibilities ◽  
The Law ◽  
Democratic Discourse

Social media are now central sites of democratic discourse among citizens. But are some contributions to social media too extreme to be permitted? This entry considers the permissibility of suppressing extreme speech on social media, such as terrorist propaganda and racist hate speech. It begins by considering the argument that such restrictions on speech would wrong democratic citizens, violating their freedom of expression. It proceeds to investigate the moral responsibilities of social media companies to suppress extreme speech, and whether these ought to be enforced through the law. Finally, it explores an alternative mechanism for combatting extreme speech on social media—counter-speech—and evaluates its prospects.

scholarly journals Review Of Islamic Law To The Use Of Article 28 Subsection 2 About Speech Hatred And Defamation (UU Number 19 AT 2016 Amendments to UU Number 11 at 2018)

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-368
Author(s):  
Arbanur Rasyid
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Many

Hate Speech  has recently become a warm conversation, not only in the media, but has begun to be discussed in scientific forums as a result of the many characters who are ensnared by hate speech due to making uploads in Social Media that is considered insulting to other people or state institutions by making a statement containing elements of hate speech in accordance with the criminal threat in Article 28 paragraph 2 of Law number 19 of 2016 amendment to law number 11 of 2008. Long before the law talks about hate speech, Islam through the Qur'an speaks a lot about how God denounces the actions of people who insult, berate, speak ill of others and make hoaxes, and Allah threatens sin for those who do it . Even in the history of Islam through the Prophet Muhammad had given a caning to people who make hoaxes, and the sentence in the Islamic criminal law is called Ta'zir, thus Islam is very careful and highly respects the human rights of a person including in protecting the soul and someone's honor

scholarly journals Penerapan Sanksi Terhadap Pelaku Ujaran Kebencian di Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-28
Author(s):  
Fahmi ◽  
Rai Iqsandri ◽  
Rizana
Keyword(s):  
Research Method ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Law

The problems examined in this study are how to apply the sanctions against the perpetrators of hate speech in the Pekanbaru District Court and what are the obstacles faced in applying the sanctions against the perpetrators of hate speech in the Pekanbaru District Court. This research method is carried out directly in the field according to the type of sociological legal research. The results of the study show that the application of sanctions against hate speech offenders in the Pekanbaru District Court is not optimal. Factors that hinder the application of sanctions against hate speech offenders do not realize that what they are doing is a criminal act that has a fairly severe sanction in accordance with the law.

The Urgency of Protecting Netizen in Freedom of Speech on Social Media

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Grandis Ayuning Priyanto ◽  
Martinus Sardi
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Speak Up

Freedom of speech is a part of fundamental rights to every people. Nowadays, freedom of speech could not felt widely to all people. Freedom of speech developed until Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights assure and restrict freedom of speech. In Indonesia, since the rise of The Law of Information and Electronic Transaction, the restriction of freedom of speech become biased, many words in social media are presumably attack others. Netizen feels security to speak up is limited, such Ruslan Buton who critics and record about President Jokowi deemed as a hoax and hate speech. Even though some articles in 1945 Constitution have already protect and guarantee all people to bear the right to speak. The limitations of Freedom of speech in The Law of Information and Electronic Transaction emerge multi interpretation which the right to speak have not been correspond with the values in 1945 Constitution. To harmonize freedom of speech in Indonesia, it needs cooperation among government and people to eradicate ambiguity and fear in which already happen.By using juridical-normative method, the research aims to understand the condition of freedom of speech in Indonesia, and to understand the protection of netizen in using social media

scholarly journals Violent crime, hate speech or terrorism? How Canada views and prosecutes far-right extremism (2001–2019)

2021 ◽  
pp. 147377952199155
Author(s):  
Michael Nesbitt
Keyword(s):  
Violent Crime ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Far Right ◽  
Canadian Law ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Law

Fifty-six individuals were charged with terrorism between December 2001 when Canada first enacted its antiterrorism criminal offences and December 2019. Not a single such individual was associated with a far-right group or espoused a far-right ideology. Over the same period of time, Canada saw a rise in far-right violence and crime, including several deadly attacks that raised the spectre of terrorism. This article seeks to identify why terrorism has not been associated with the activities of those on the far right, how Canada has prosecuted far-right violence if not for terrorism and what the implications are for Canada’s criminal prosecutions going forward. It finds that since December 2001 all publicly reported hate speech cases and cases where an individual’s sentence was aggravated for hate have involved individuals espousing far-right rhetoric; likewise, all but one case where the media raised the spectre of terrorism but no such charge ensued can be described as being motivated by far-right ideation. In the result, Canadian law punishes more seriously Al-Qaida (AQ)-inspired extremism than far-right extremism, while stigmatizing the former more than the latter. The time has thus come to tackle head-on the concept of ideology in Canadian criminal law, and how the law treats various ideologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document