Quick Answer: Freedom of Expression / Kebebasan Berekspresi
Berekspresi adalah hak asasi manusia yang melindungi kebebasan setiap orang untuk menyampaikan pendapat, informasi, dan ide melalui berbagai media. Kebebasan berekspresi dijamin Pasal 19 UDHR (1948), Pasal 19 ICCPR (1966), dan Pasal 10 ECHR (1950) — namun dapat dibatasi secara sah oleh hukum demi keamanan nasional, ketertiban umum, atau hak orang lain.
Freedom of Expression: Definition and International Legal Basis
Freedom of expression is one of the most fundamental human rights in international law. It protects every person’s right to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds — through speech, writing, art, journalism, protest, or digital platforms — without censorship or fear of punishment. In Indonesian, this right is known as kebebasan berekspresi, and “berekspresi adalah” literally translates as “to express is” — meaning the act of expression is itself a protected right.
The right is guaranteed by three principal international instruments:
- Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948): “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
- Article 19, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966): Provides legally binding protection, covering both the right to hold opinions without interference and the right to freedom of expression.
- Article 10, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, 1950): Protects freedom of expression including freedom to hold opinions, receive information, and impart information without interference by public authority.
Kebebasan Berekspresi: Definisi dalam Hukum Internasional dan Indonesia
Kebebasan berekspresi adalah hak asasi manusia yang fundamental, diakui oleh hukum internasional dan nasional. Berekspresi adalah hak untuk menyatakan pendapat, menyebarkan informasi, dan mengekspresikan diri melalui berbagai media — lisan, tulisan, seni, maupun platform digital — tanpa intervensi negara yang tidak sah.
Di Indonesia, hak kebebasan berekspresi dilindungi oleh Pasal 28E ayat (3) UUD 1945 yang menyatakan: “Setiap orang berhak atas kebebasan berserikat, berkumpul, dan mengeluarkan pendapat.” Selain itu, Indonesia telah meratifikasi ICCPR melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2005, sehingga ketentuan Pasal 19 ICCPR mengikat secara hukum di Indonesia.
International Legal Framework for Freedom of Expression
| Instrument | Article | Key Provision | Scope |
|---|---|---|---|
| UDHR (1948) | Article 19 | Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; to seek, receive and impart information through any media | Universal; non-binding declaration |
| ICCPR (1966) | Article 19 | Right to hold opinions without interference; freedom of expression includes all media, regardless of frontiers | Legally binding; 173 states parties |
| ECHR (1950) | Article 10 | Freedom of expression including right to receive and impart information; restrictions must be necessary in a democratic society | Binding in 46 Council of Europe states |
| ACHR (1969) | Article 13 | Freedom of thought and expression; prohibits prior censorship | Binding in Americas (OAS members) |
| African Charter (1981) | Article 9 | Right to receive information; right to express and disseminate opinions | Binding in 55 African Union states |
| UUD 1945 (Indonesia) | Article 28E(3) | Setiap orang berhak atas kebebasan berserikat, berkumpul, dan mengeluarkan pendapat | Binding in Indonesia |
History of Freedom of Expression
The history of freedom of expression spans millennia, from ancient philosophical debate to modern constitutional protections and digital rights battles.
Ancient Roots
Classical Greek philosophers recognised the importance of open debate (parrhesia — frank speech) in public life. Athenian democracy, despite its limitations, valued the right to speak in the assembly (isegoria). However, even Socrates was executed in 399 BCE for allegedly corrupting the youth with his ideas, demonstrating the fragility of expressive freedom even in ancient democracies.
Early Modern Era: The Printing Press and Censorship
The invention of the printing press by Gutenberg (c. 1440) unleashed an information revolution — and an immediate backlash of censorship by monarchies and the Church. John Milton’s Areopagitica (1644) became the first major philosophical defence of freedom of the press against government licensing and prior censorship, laying the intellectual groundwork for modern free speech doctrine.
Constitutional Recognition
The 18th century saw freedom of expression enshrined in constitutional documents:
- French Revolution (1789): The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (Article 11) declared that “the free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the most precious rights of man.”
- United States (1791): The First Amendment to the US Constitution guaranteed freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly — creating the world’s most expansive free speech protection.
International Codification (20th Century)
The horrors of World War II — enabled by state propaganda and enforced silence — led to the post-war human rights revolution. The UDHR (1948) and ICCPR (1966) established freedom of expression as a universal human right. In Europe, Article 10 of the ECHR (1950) created a legally enforceable right backed by an international court.
Permissible Restrictions on Freedom of Expression
Freedom of expression is not absolute. Under international law — including ICCPR Article 19(3) and ECHR Article 10(2) — restrictions are permissible only if they meet the three-part test (in Indonesian: tes tiga tahap):
- Prescribed by law (Diatur oleh undang-undang): The restriction must be clearly set out in accessible law — not left to official discretion.
- Legitimate aim (Tujuan yang sah): The restriction must serve one of the recognised purposes: national security, public order, public health or morals, or the rights of others.
- Necessary and proportionate (Diperlukan dan proporsional): The restriction must be necessary in a democratic society — proportionate to the aim pursued, and not more restrictive than needed.
Landmark Cases: Freedom of Expression in International Law
| Case | Court / Year | Issue | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Handyside v. United Kingdom | ECtHR, 1976 | Prosecution of “The Little Red Schoolbook” for obscenity | Established “necessary in a democratic society” test; introduced margin of appreciation doctrine; affirmed that free expression protects ideas that “offend, shock or disturb” |
| Sunday Times v. United Kingdom | ECtHR, 1979 | Injunction against newspaper reporting on thalidomide litigation | Landmark for press freedom; restrictions on reporting must meet strict proportionality test |
| Lingens v. Austria | ECtHR, 1986 | Criminal defamation of politician | Established that politicians must tolerate wider criticism than private individuals; crucial for political speech protection |
| Jersild v. Denmark | ECtHR, 1994 | Journalist convicted for broadcasting racist interview | Protected journalistic reporting on racism even where content was offensive; affirmed media’s “watchdog” role |
| Delfi AS v. Estonia | ECtHR Grand Chamber, 2015 | Liability of online news portal for user comments | Addressed internet freedom; portals can bear responsibility for third-party content in certain circumstances |
| Orbán v. Hungary (series) | ECtHR, 2020s | Media freedom and government interference with press | Applied Article 10 to systematic media capture and editorial independence |
| New York Times v. Sullivan | US Supreme Court, 1964 | Defamation by public officials | Established “actual malice” standard; US cornerstone of political speech protection |
Freedom of Expression and Digital Rights
In the digital age, freedom of expression — kebebasan berekspresi online — has become one of the defining human rights battlegrounds. The UN Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 34 (2011) confirmed that Article 19 of the ICCPR applies fully to electronic and internet-based expression, including blogging, social media, and online journalism.
Key challenges to digital freedom of expression include state surveillance and mass data collection, website blocking and internet shutdowns, platform content moderation and algorithmic censorship, “fake news” laws that restrict legitimate speech, and cybercrime laws used against journalists and activists.
The European Court of Human Rights has increasingly addressed digital expression cases under Article 10 ECHR, recognising that the internet is a public space where free expression must be robustly protected while acknowledging the challenges of online hate speech and disinformation.
Kebebasan Berekspresi di Indonesia (Freedom of Expression in Indonesia)
Hak kebebasan berekspresi di Indonesia dilindungi oleh beberapa instrumen hukum nasional dan internasional. Indonesia adalah negara pihak ICCPR sejak 2005, dan Pasal 19 ICCPR berlaku sebagai hukum yang mengikat. Konstitusi Indonesia (UUD 1945) juga secara eksplisit melindungi hak berpendapat.
Namun, pelaksanaan kebebasan berekspresi di Indonesia masih menghadapi tantangan. Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (UU ITE) telah digunakan dalam beberapa kasus untuk membatasi ekspresi online. Komunitas internasional, termasuk Komite HAM PBB, telah menyerukan agar Indonesia memastikan bahwa pembatasan kebebasan berekspresi memenuhi tes tiga tahap ICCPR: legal, bertujuan sah, dan proporsional.
Bagi warga negara Indonesia yang menghadapi pelanggaran hak kebebasan berekspresi dengan elemen lintas batas atau internasional, mekanisme ECHR dapat berlaku dalam konteks tertentu. Untuk informasi lebih lanjut tentang perlindungan hukum internasional, konsultasikan dengan pengacara ECHR Pasal 10 atau pelajari tentang makna dan sejarah ECHR.
Why Freedom of Expression Matters
Freedom of expression — kebebasan berekspresi — is not merely a legal right but the foundation of democratic society. As the European Court of Human Rights held in Handyside v. United Kingdom (1976), free expression applies not only to information or ideas “that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population.” This is the price of a pluralistic, tolerant, and open democratic society.
Without freedom of expression, other rights wither. A free press exposes corruption. Political debate requires the right to criticise those in power. Whistleblowers cannot speak truth to power without protection. Minorities cannot advocate for their rights. The right to berekspresi — to express — is thus interconnected with the right to a fair trial, the right to assembly, freedom of religion, and the prohibition of discrimination.
Seeking Legal Protection for Freedom of Expression
If your freedom of expression rights have been violated by a government authority — whether through censorship, criminal prosecution for speech, media suppression, or internet blocking — you may have recourse under international or European human rights law. Our lawyers have represented clients in freedom of expression cases before the European Court of Human Rights, including cases involving journalists, activists, and political dissidents.
Learn more about Article 10 ECHR and freedom of expression legal protection, or contact our team to discuss whether your case qualifies for submission to the Strasbourg Court.