Deeper dive with @Andriyani+Hidayat on the latest Indonesia case of judicial harassment of pro-democracy activists
Following the demonstrations of August 25-31, 2025, the Indonesian National Police arrested thousands of demonstrators, including 4 pro-democracy activists: Lokataru Foundation Director Delpedro Marhaen, Lokataru Foundation staff Muzaffar Salim, administrator of the Instagram account Gejayan Memanggil Syahdan Husein, and young activist from the Student Plaintiffs Alliance (Aliansi Mahasiswa Penggugat) Khariq Anhar, on charges of inciting students. All four are currently still detained by the Polda Metro Jaya (Jakarta Metropolitan Police).
Referring to facts released by the police, between August 25-30, 2025, using the Instagram platform, they collaborated to upload content and posters inviting students to demonstrate. Instagram accounts Blok Politik Pelajar, Gejayan Memanggil, and Aliansi Mahasiswa Penggugat uploaded various content inviting students to demonstrate. Meanwhile, the Lokataru Foundation’s IG account uploaded a poster containing a complaint post service for students with content also inviting students to demonstrate with the words “let’s fight together.”
In the eyes of Polda Metro Jaya investigators, the actions of these activists constituted incitement, and because they targeted students who, by age and law, fall into the category of children, their actions were considered endangering the safety of children. Therefore, it was a crime, and they deserved to be arrested and detained to stand trial and be held accountable for their actions. Furthermore, investigators even accused them of creating false news and violating the ITE Law. However, is this perspective of the investigators sufficiently reasoned and legally sound?
Legal Dimension of Student Political Expression and Participation: The Difference between Encouraging Children’s Political Expression (Political Education) and Exploiting Children for Political Purposes.
If we refer to the facts released by the police above, and assuming those facts are true, we can see that these four activists did indeed engage in actions inviting students to demonstrate. However, this fact – “let’s fight together” – can also be seen and interpreted as an invitation to encourage and motivate students to act critically and express their political views on the situations occurring around them and related to their actions, in this case, two main contexts: public protest over the planned increase in allowances for DPR members and public anger over the tragic death of Affan Kurniawan.
In this interpretation, we can proceed to conduct further legal analysis by examining whether the act of encouraging political expression and political participation of students, young people who are not yet adults by legal age, is something prohibited by law and therefore categorized as a form of criminal act? Or, on the contrary, is it a legitimate activity and even encouraged as part of political education?
Legal rules, both national and international, provide a very clear dividing line between the right of a child to express political views and/or participate in politics and the act of motivating and encouraging it (encouraging) as part of political education, and the act of exploiting and/or utilizing a child for political purposes.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), especially the key articles regulating children’s political expression and participation, namely Article 12, Article 13, and Article 15, ensures that children have the right to voice their opinions and be involved in matters affecting them, including political matters. The right of children to peaceful assembly and association (Article 15) states that children have the right to meet with friends, form or join groups, and take part in peaceful protests.
In line with international regulations, several laws and regulations in Indonesia support and recognize the rights of citizens, including students and adolescents, to participate in politics, including demonstrating political expression—demonstrations and others—although with clear limitations. The 1945 Constitution (UUD 1945) recognizes the freedom of association, assembly, and expression as a human right. This right serves as a foundation for individuals, including youth, to engage in political life. This constitutional guarantee applies to all citizens regardless of age. Law Number 2 of 2011 concerning Political Parties also states that political parties have the function of carrying out political education for the community, including fostering awareness of political rights and obligations. Furthermore, the Decree of the Minister of Women Empowerment and Child Protection (Kemen PPPA) also recognizes child participation as one of the four basic rights of children, in addition to the rights to life, growth and development, and protection.
Meanwhile, there is indeed Article 15 of Law Number 35 of 2014 concerning Child Protection, which prohibits the abuse of children in political activities. This exploitation can take the form of involving children in demonstrations, convoys, or even making them campaigners, which is vulnerable to endangering the physical and psychological well-being of children. However, upon closer examination, what is prohibited in this article are the acts and elements of exploitation, not the demonstrations themselves. This makes sense and is reasonable, because if children’s demonstrations or involving children in demonstrations were prohibited, it would not align with the recognition and protection of children’s right to expression, including political expression such as demonstrations and others. The CRC itself clearly does not prohibit children from demonstrating. What the CRC prohibits is not the involvement of children in demonstrating, but rather the prohibition of child exploitation for political purposes that endanger the safety of children. In this context, calls for demonstrations involving violence that endanger children must be seen as violating the principle of the child’s best interests.
Referring to the international and national rules outlined above, the actions of activists who upload flyers inviting demonstrations on social media cannot be immediately misinterpreted as an attempt to exploit children for political purposes. On the contrary, it is a legitimate and encouraged action to promote and develop critical awareness among students and serves as an important element of healthy political participation and education for building a more mature democracy.
In a democratic state, citizen participation in political life is crucial. Student and youth groups, as part of the younger generation, play a very important role as national assets who are idealistic and highly motivated. Inviting them to express their political interests and participate in politics is not a criminal act, but rather an effort to build critical and responsible political awareness. The significant involvement of students in political life or expression indicates an increasingly mature democracy.
Thus, encouraging students and youth to express political views and participate in conveying political aspirations through demonstrations is not an illegal act, but rather a necessary effort to build a healthy and mature democracy in the future. However, the line between political education and political exploitation must be clearly understood. Recognizing students’ right to political expression means positioning them as responsible subjects, equipping them with knowledge, courage, and critical awareness, while political exploitation treats them more as objects and utilizes them only for pragmatic interests. The state, parents, and society must work together to ensure that students and young people get their right to engage and voice their political interests, while protecting them from all forms of illegal political abuse. In doing so, we can respect them and at the same time receive blessings from this generation, a generation that is critical, creative, and ready to be the driving force for the nation’s progress.
Andriyani + Hidayat | Counsellors at Law 