The government should provide training and education for judges on the use of social media and the application of law in the digital era

Oct 13, 2025 by talynt.org 8 views

Juridical Analysis of Free Decisions (Vrijspraak) on the Demands of Criminal Offenses and/or Defamation through Social Media: Study of Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO

Introduction

In the digital era, social media has become a platform for people to express themselves and share their thoughts and opinions. However, this has also led to an increase in cases of criminal offenses and/or defamation through social media. The Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO, which acquitted the defendant Mohamad Aksa Patundu of the charges of insult and/or defamation, has sparked interest in the juridical analysis of free decisions (Vrijspraak) in such cases. This study aims to analyze the decision and provide insights into the application of law in the digital era.

Background

The use of social media has become widespread, and it has become a platform for people to express themselves and share their thoughts and opinions. However, this has also led to an increase in cases of criminal offenses and/or defamation through social media. The Indonesian government has implemented laws and regulations to regulate the use of social media and prevent criminal offenses and/or defamation. However, the application of these laws and regulations in the digital era is a complex issue that requires a comprehensive understanding of the law and technology.

Methodology

This study uses a normative juridical method with literature study data collection techniques. The data analysis is conducted using qualitative methods. The study aims to analyze the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO and provide insights into the application of law in the digital era.

Theoretical Framework

The study is based on the integrative theory that forms legal arrangements based on the values contained in the first and second principles of Pancasila. The construction of the Free Decision (Vrijspraak) as stipulated in Article 191 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code states that the free decision (Vrijspraak) was imposed based on the absence of an error from the perpetrators, but in the explanation of Article 191 paragraph (1) the Criminal Procedure Code was not mentioned Failed by the Public Prosecutor.

Analysis of Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO

The analysis of the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO shows that judges, in applying the theory of multidisciplinary law interpretation, need to master knowledge outside the law, especially linguistic science. This is important considering the complexity of the language and meaning contained in social media content. The decision also highlights the importance of multidisciplinary law interpretation in understanding the context of online communication and distinguishing between criticism and insults.

The Importance of Multidisciplinary Law Interpretation

The decision of the Poso District Court in this case is interesting because it alludes to important aspects in the application of law in the digital era. The increasingly massive use of social media makes the potential for criminal acts of insult and/or defamation greater. In this context, judges are required to understand digital notation, slang, and the context of online communication in order to be able to interpret the content that is objectively and fairly questioned.

Conclusion

The Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO provides an important insight regarding the application of law in cases of criminal offenses and/or defamation through social media. Comprehensive legal analysis, including the use of multidisciplinary legal interpretation theory, is very necessary to ensure justice and legal certainty in the digital era. The decision highlights the importance of judges having a broad understanding of technology, internet culture, and the dynamics of digital communication.

Recommendations

Based on the analysis of the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO, the following recommendations are made:

Judges should have a broad understanding of technology, internet culture, and the dynamics of digital communication. This will help judges in understanding the context of the questioning speech, distinguishing between criticism and insults, and understanding the limits of freedom of expression and the right to respect the dignity and dignity of others.
Comprehensive legal analysis, including the use of multidisciplinary legal interpretation theory, is very necessary to ensure justice and legal certainty in the digital era. This will help judges in making informed decisions and ensuring that justice is served.
The government should provide training and education for judges on the use of social media and the application of law in the digital era. This will help judges in understanding the complexities of social media and the law, and in making informed decisions.

Limitations of the Study

This study has several limitations. Firstly, the study is based on a single case, and the findings may not be generalizable to other cases. Secondly, the study relies on secondary data, and the accuracy of the data may be limited. Finally, the study does not provide a comprehensive analysis of the law and technology, and the findings may be limited by the scope of the study.

Future Research Directions

This study provides several directions for future research. Firstly, future studies should investigate the application of law in other cases of criminal offenses and/or defamation through social media. Secondly, future studies should explore the use of technology and social media in the application of law. Finally, future studies should investigate the impact of the digital era on the application of law and the role of judges in ensuring justice and legal certainty.

References

[1] Article 191 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
[2] Decision of the Poso District Court No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO
[3] Integrative theory that forms legal arrangements based on the values contained in the first and second principles of Pancasila
[4] Multidisciplinary law interpretation theory
[5] Pancasila principles

Appendix

[1] List of abbreviations
[2] List of acronyms
[3] List of references cited in the study
[4] List of tables and figures used in the study
[5] List of appendices used in the study
Q&A: Juridical Analysis of Free Decisions (Vrijspraak) on the Demands of Criminal Offenses and/or Defamation through Social Media

Introduction

In our previous article, we discussed the juridical analysis of free decisions (Vrijspraak) on the demands of criminal offenses and/or defamation through social media, using the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO as a case study. In this article, we will answer some of the most frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to this topic.

Q: What is a free decision (Vrijspraak) in the context of criminal law?

A: A free decision (Vrijspraak) is a decision made by a judge in a criminal case where the defendant is acquitted of the charges due to a lack of evidence or a technicality. In the context of the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO, the judge acquitted the defendant of the charges of insult and/or defamation due to a lack of evidence.

Q: What is the significance of the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO?

A: The Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO is significant because it highlights the importance of multidisciplinary law interpretation in understanding the context of online communication and distinguishing between criticism and insults. The decision also shows that judges need to have a broad understanding of technology, internet culture, and the dynamics of digital communication.

Q: What is multidisciplinary law interpretation?

A: Multidisciplinary law interpretation is a theory that suggests that judges should consider multiple disciplines, including law, technology, and social sciences, when interpreting the law. In the context of the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO, the judge used multidisciplinary law interpretation to understand the context of the online communication and distinguish between criticism and insults.

Q: What are the implications of the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO for judges and the legal system?

A: The Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO has several implications for judges and the legal system. Firstly, it highlights the importance of judges having a broad understanding of technology, internet culture, and the dynamics of digital communication. Secondly, it shows that judges need to use multidisciplinary law interpretation to understand the context of online communication and distinguish between criticism and insults. Finally, it suggests that the legal system needs to be adapted to the changing nature of communication in the digital era.

Q: What are the limitations of the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO?

A: The Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO has several limitations. Firstly, it is based on a single case, and the findings may not be generalizable to other cases. Secondly, it relies on secondary data, and the accuracy of the data may be limited. Finally, it does not provide a comprehensive analysis of the law and technology, and the findings may be limited by the scope of the study.

Q: What are the future research directions related to the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO?

A: There are several future research directions related to the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO. Firstly, future studies should investigate the application of law in other cases of criminal offenses and/or defamation through social media. Secondly, future studies should explore the use of technology and social media in the application of law. Finally, future studies should investigate the impact of the digital era on the application of law and the role of judges in ensuring justice and legal certainty.

Q: What are the recommendations for judges and the legal system based on the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO?

A: The recommendations for judges and the legal system based on the Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO are as follows:

Judges should have a broad understanding of technology, internet culture, and the dynamics of digital communication. This will help judges in understanding the context of the questioning speech, distinguishing between criticism and insults, and understanding the limits of freedom of expression and the right to respect the dignity and dignity of others.
Comprehensive legal analysis, including the use of multidisciplinary legal interpretation theory, is very necessary to ensure justice and legal certainty in the digital era. This will help judges in making informed decisions and ensuring that justice is served.
The government should provide training and education for judges on the use of social media and the application of law in the digital era. This will help judges in understanding the complexities of social media and the law, and in making informed decisions.

Conclusion

The Poso District Court Decision No. 262/Pid.Sus/2017/PN.PSO is a significant case that highlights the importance of multidisciplinary law interpretation in understanding the context of online communication and distinguishing between criticism and insults. The decision also shows that judges need to have a broad understanding of technology, internet culture, and the dynamics of digital communication. We hope that this Q&A article has provided a comprehensive understanding of the case and its implications for judges and the legal system.