Coverage of the ‘Perppu Ormas’ Issue by the Government vs Mainstream Online Media: Defending or Attacking the Pancasila?
Proceeding of 2nd International Conference of Communication Science Research, 24-25 July 2018; Surabaya, Indonesia
5 Pages Posted: 31 Oct 2018 Last revised: 7 Nov 2018
Date Written: July 24, 2018
10th of July 2017, the President of the Republic of Indonesia issued a Government Regulation In Lieu of Law No. 2 of 2017 (known as ‘Perppu Ormas’) to revise the Law No. 17 of 2013 concerning Societal Organization (known as ‘UU Ormas’), and finally legalized by the House of Representatives as a revised Law. This law is claimed to safeguard the state ideology of Pancasila by disbanding Anti-Pancasila societal organizations (SO).
The first change is that previously only atheism and communism/Marxism-Leninism is considered as ‘Anti-Pancasila’. Now it includes ‘changing Pancasila and the constitution’. The second change is that previously to disband an SO would require a court ruling, now such court ruling is no longer required. With a doctrinal legal research, two things will be found: the first change is a minor one considering the framework of UU Ormas, while the second change is a major one because it is an issue of potential infringement of constitutional rights. Surely the Pancasila was never intended to violate a constitutional right. However, does the media do any better to defend the Pancasila?
With a content analysis research, the extent of coverage Government online media on the Perppu Ormas issue will be observed. It is found that there is a tendency of Government online media to very heavily provide coverage of the first change is so heavily extensive, despite it being a minor change. It is found also that the second change receives very little coverage, despite it being a major change. With the same method, some online mainstream media is observed. It is found that there is still a tendency to highlight the first change more, but much less drastic.
As shown above, this research is primarily a content analysis research but also combined with a doctrinal legal research. It is concluded that the contrast of coverage can distort and mislead the public in supporting the Perppu Ormas and newly revised UU Ormas. Further, the online media is doing a better but not sufficient role in this.
Keywords: Media Coverage, Perppu Ormas, Indonesia, Human Rights, Pancasila
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation