DENPASAR, Bali — A civil lawsuit seeking Rp25 billion (approximately US$1.5 million) in damages against four Bali-based news organizations has attracted national attention after an Indonesian lawmaker and several journalist associations raised concerns about its potential implications for press freedom.
The lawsuit, filed by lawyer Togar Situmorang and registered under case number 958/Pdt.G/2026/PN Dps at the Denpasar District Court, relates to news reports published by four Bali media companies: PT Bali Intermedia Digital (Radar Buleleng), PT Artha Media Fajar Bali Utama Press (Fajar Bali), PT Bali Warta Kencana (Balipolitika.com), and PT Mangupura Inter Media (MangupuraNews.com).
The case remains before the court, and no ruling has been issued.
National Lawmaker Calls for Respect for Press Freedom
Parta, a member of Indonesia’s House of Representatives (DPR RI) and Chairman of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) faction group at the House’s Legislative Body, called on all parties to respect press freedom and journalistic work based on factual reporting.
“Let us respect press freedom. Let us respect journalistic work that is produced through reporting based on facts and actual legal events,” Parta said.
According to Parta, Indonesia’s Press Council already provides mechanisms for resolving disputes involving journalistic content, including the right of reply and the right of correction.
He said legal action against media organizations should not undermine the role of the press in providing public oversight, particularly when those mechanisms have been made available.
Parta also expressed support for the efforts of Solidaritas Jurnalis Bali (SJB), which has announced it will assist the four media organizations as the civil proceedings continue.
Journalist Organizations Submit Amicus Curiae
Separately, Solidaritas Jurnalis Bali submitted an amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” brief to the Denpasar District Court.
The submission asks the panel of judges to consider Indonesia’s Press Law and existing legal mechanisms governing disputes involving news reporting.
According to the coalition, complaints regarding journalistic work should first be addressed through procedures administered by the Press Council, including the right of reply and the right of correction, before other legal avenues are pursued.
Press Groups Raise Broader Concerns
Several journalist organizations supporting the submission said they are concerned the case could have broader implications for media organizations beyond Bali.
Tri Widiyanti, Chair of the Indonesian Online Journalists Association (IWO) Bali, said the coalition hopes the court will take into account legal protections designed for the press.
“The press is the fourth pillar of democracy,” she said. “We hope the court will consider the legal framework governing journalistic work when examining this case.”
Some media organizations have described the lawsuit as sharing characteristics commonly associated with a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), a term used internationally for legal actions that critics argue may discourage public participation or investigative reporting through costly litigation.
The Denpasar District Court has not made any finding on whether the present case falls within that description.
Legal Framework
In its submission, Solidaritas Jurnalis Bali cited:
- Constitutional Court Decision No. 145/PUU-XXIII/2025
- Supreme Court Circular (SEMA) No. 13 of 2008
The coalition argues these legal references support resolving disputes involving journalistic work through mechanisms established under Indonesia’s Press Law.
Whether those arguments apply in this case will ultimately be determined by the court.
Plaintiff’s Lawsuit Remains Before the Court
The lawsuit filed by Togar Situmorang remains under consideration by the Denpasar District Court.
Hey Bali News has not independently reviewed the full court filings setting out the plaintiff’s legal arguments. The court has not issued a decision, and the allegations and legal positions of the parties have yet to be tested through the judicial process.
