jakarta – Activist Laras Faizati received a six-month probationary sentence Thursday for social media posts connected to 2025 protests over rising costs of living and a controversial new criminal code, a ruling that has sparked concern among human rights advocates. While Faizati will not face imprisonment if she remains crime-free for a year, the case highlights a growing trend of Indonesian authorities utilizing broad interpretations of “incitement” to stifle dissent and restrict freedom of expression, particularly among women and young people. This report details the legal proceedings, the context of the protests, and the broader implications for civic freedoms in Indonesia.
Sumber gambar, Yayasan Keadilan dan Perdamaian Indonesia
Reading time: 14 minutes
A Jakarta court on Thursday sentenced activist Laras Faizati to six months of probation, a punishment she will not have to serve if she remains crime-free for one year. The case has drawn attention to concerns about freedom of expression and the criminalization of dissent in Indonesia.
“Sentencing the defendant to six months in prison, ordering that the sentence not be carried out, provided the defendant does not commit any further crimes while under supervision for one year,” said presiding Judge I Ketut Darpawan while delivering the verdict on Thursday.
The court also ordered Laras to be immediately released from custody following the ruling.
“Ordering the defendant to be released from custody immediately after this verdict is read,” Darpawan said, as reported by BBC News Indonesia.
Following the verdict, Laras attributed her resilience to the support she received from many individuals and groups.
“I realize today that I am not just fighting for myself,” Laras said. “I am fighting for justice for everyone – young people who speak out, women who express themselves, and all those who struggle for justice.”
“Even though I was found guilty, and opinions, criticism, and expressions of anger about a very heartbreaking political situation should not be criminalized, all the police officers who oppressed them remain free. Therefore, justice has not been fully served.”
“I hope today is a starting point for Indonesia to build more space to accommodate the voices of women and youth. Thank you all. Long live women,” she concluded.
Why Calls for Laras’s Release Grew
Prior to the sentencing, widespread support for Laras came from civil society groups.
Activists argued that Laras’s case represented an attempt to narrow public space for expressing opinions, and specifically, a restriction on women’s voices.
“If Laras is found guilty, many women, or people out there, might be afraid to speak up,” said women’s rights activist Kalis Mardiasih during a discussion on Wednesday.
Kalis explained that most of the female political prisoners, including Laras, were not present at demonstrations. They voiced their opinions through social media posts.
“There’s something strange about this. It shows that ordinary people tweeting are considered dangerous. We ordinary people making Instagram stories, WhatsApp stories, or replying to comments are considered dangerous. There’s a kind of fearmongering movement that even ordinary people without followers can be criminalized for replying or sharing a story.”
The political prisoners, including Laras, were designated as suspects and arrested following large-scale protests in August 2025.
According to data from the Youth Movement Against Criminalization (GMLK), the number of political prisoners following the wave of protests in August-September 2025 totaled 652.
The demonstrations lasted for days in front of the DPR building.
One trigger was the perceived excessive salaries and housing allowances of DPR members, while many citizens struggled to find employment.
On the evening of August 28, the protests turned tragic with the death of ride-hailing driver Affan Kurniawan, who was run over by a police tactical vehicle.
This sparked empathy and anger among the public, which was then expressed through social media.
However, those who tried to voice their opinions were then silenced and accused of incitement, a charge also leveled against Laras.
“This August-September action was one of the peaks of how criminalization and silencing were openly displayed, explicitly. That the state wants to show it has the power to arrest anyone, to silence anyone who is considered disruptive, including citizens in the digital space,” said Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network (SAFEnet) Executive Director Nenden Sekar Arum.
Separately, Amnesty International Executive Director Usman Hamid added that the upcoming verdict would be a test for the judicial system.
Usman stated that a not-guilty verdict in Laras’s case would set a precedent for cases involving Delpedro, Azril, and Gilang in Surabaya.
The verdict would send a message that the judiciary can act as a check on law enforcement when it comes to criminalizing freedom of expression, he said. “The judges have an opportunity to set a new standard in protecting civil liberties,” Usman said.
Sumber gambar, Kompas.com/Hanifah Salsabila
What considerations did the judge have in Laras’s sentencing?
Although the panel of judges ordered Laras to be released from custody immediately after the verdict was read, the criminal act she was accused of under Article 161 paragraph (1) of the Indonesian Criminal Code still stood.
“Considering that regarding state intervention using criminal law in this case, the Panel of Judges believes it is appropriate because it is intended to protect public order and the rights of others. Incitement to burn government buildings or the National Police Headquarters is an act that endangers the public,” said presiding Judge I Ketut Darpawan.
“The defendant’s request to invite people to burn the National Police Headquarters cannot be categorized as criticism or public opinion aimed at assessing the integrity of police personnel or institutions, but is an act intended to commit a criminal offense.”
Based on these considerations, the panel of judges viewed the use of criminal law as a form of state intervention in this case as legitimate to restore security and public order.
“Considering that in the trial, the panel of judges did not find any circumstances that could eliminate criminal responsibility, both as a reason for justification or excuse, and the defendant is able to be held responsible, the defendant must be declared guilty and sentenced,” Darpawan said.
Sumber gambar, LBH Apik
In this ruling, the judges also touched on the tone of criticism. This was based on Laras’s background and work history, which was considered capable of conveying criticism well.
“The defendant did not face any difficulties in writing her thoughts about the collapse of police integrity in a clear and concise manner in accordance with what was on her mind,” said presiding Judge Ketut.
“Criticizing the integrity of the police in a straightforward and argumentative manner is protected by law. The defendant did not need to ask others to commit violence or anything destructive to express criticism or to make her criticism more appealing.”
However, in further consideration, the panel of judges did not agree with the prosecution’s demand. According to the judges, even if the act of incitement was carried out intentionally and at a time when public conditions were angry and potentially dangerous to public safety and public order, certain things did not materialize.
Among them: Laras did not take any further concrete action to realize her incitement, such as organizing or gathering like-minded people to commit the same act, either using electronic or conventional means.
Furthermore, Laras’s life history and social conditions were considered to have the potential to become a better person, so a long prison sentence could negatively impact her future.
Therefore, the panel of judges chose a type of punishment that emphasized education or rehabilitation and gave Laras the opportunity to improve herself to become a more careful person when using social media in her daily life. Rehabilitation outside of a correctional institution was also considered appropriate for Laras.
Separately, the police were asked to investigate allegations of unlawful disclosure of Laras’s personal data and threats against her, as revealed during the trial, and to act fairly. “With the authority and resources available, it will not be difficult to uncover the truth of the matter,” Ketut said.
Laras’s legal team and the prosecution both stated they would take time to consider the verdict.
What’s Next for Women’s Voices?
Sumber gambar, Detikcom/Gilang Faturahman
The guilty verdict in Laras’s case serves as a warning to freedom of expression for citizens, especially women. In this context, women as a vulnerable group may face various stigmas and burdens in addition to the criminal issues surrounding them.
Women’s rights activist Kalis Mardiasih highlighted that the arrest of these women demonstrates a new pattern in the arrest of political prisoners. “There’s a new pattern that these women are seen as agents or subjects who are dangerous,” Kalis said.
She emphasized that most of the female political prisoners, including Laras, did not participate in the demonstrations, and were not even present at the locations. Most only posted expressions of empathy and concern through social media.
“Women when writing can have a strong emotional element that makes people more touched, more able to show solidarity. So, I’m catching that there’s a fear of women who ignite solidarity even if they’re just on social media,” Kalis said.
Besides Laras, Kalis also pointed to the case of Figha Lesmana, who was released by police. Figha was accused of provoking students to protest through her TikTok livestream. Some of the charges against Figha were similar to those against Laras, namely Article 160 of the Criminal Code and Article 45A of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law.
Police arrived at Figha’s home on September 1, 2025, around 10 p.m., with 10 officers. Figha was forced to sign a suspect designation letter and was not given the opportunity to have legal counsel. On September 2, Figha was again forced to sign a detention order.
Figha is a mother breastfeeding a child under two years old. “She wasn’t even asked about her reproductive condition. She wasn’t allowed to bring a pump, necessities for breastfeeding her child. She was immediately separated from her child who is less than two years old,” Kalis said.
“For days, Figha had a fever in the police station. Because breastfeeding mothers, if suddenly separated and not breastfeeding, their breasts become swollen and hard. Because of that, she had a fever for days. Her child also stopped breastfeeding.”
Although eventually released, this demonstrates the arbitrariness of the authorities and the state towards citizens who are rightfully entitled to freedom of expression. “Suddenly there’s a knock on the door, and they’re taken away. That’s the situation. Maybe we feel like we won’t be victims, Laras and Figha didn’t expect it either. But anyone could end up in the same situation,” Kalis said.
Laras’s lawyer, Uli Arta Pangaribuan, expressed sadness over the guilty verdict. For Uli, the verdict was heavily influenced by political considerations rather than legal grounds.
“We believe there was a strong political background to this. Because the consideration might be that if Laras is completely free from all charges, the verdict will be used as jurisprudence for other political prisoners,” Uli said.
However, this can still have an impact on democracy in the country, especially for the voices of women who have often been discriminated against. In this context, it could also affect women who want to speak out, fearing not only criminal charges but also the stigma that follows.
Laras stated in her plea, “If expression, criticism, and inner voice are criminalized, then what is the meaning of democracy and freedom of expression guaranteed by the constitution?”
She also recounted fellow female prisoners urging her not to repeat criticism on social media, with many of those women being mothers who advised their children not to criticize the state for fear of imprisonment.
Laras felt saddened by the situation.
In her defense, a free verdict for Laras could break the chain of silencing women’s voices and break the chain of fear for women to speak up.
This is because women who speak out against the state face a double burden, not only fighting against state repression but also having to deal with patriarchal culture that places critical female voices as something provocative that needs to be silenced.
Who is Laras Faizati Khairunnisa?
Before becoming known to the public, Laras worked as an Attachment Officer at the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA).
She held the position since January to May 2024.
In September 2024, she became a Communication Officer at AIPA.
Laras, who holds a Master’s degree, previously interned at various international organizations and embassies in positions such as staff communicator, social media staff, or content creator.
Although she has over three thousand followers on Instagram, only dozens of people viewed the stories she posted during the demonstrations.
