Indonesia, a nation with a complex socio-political landscape, is intensifying its efforts to regulate and censor content related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) identities. A proposed Broadcasting Bill, which surfaced in March 2024 and was prioritized again in November, aims to extend the authority of the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI) to digital platforms, including social media. This legislative move is part of a broader trend of increasing state control over online content, raising significant concerns among LGBT advocates about heightened discrimination and marginalization. Combined with other laws, such as the new Military Law and a proposed police surveillance bill, these measures signal a troubling trajectory for sexual and gender minorities in Indonesia. This article delves into the details of these developments, their historical context, the societal impact, and the hidden truths behind Indonesia’s censorship policies.

The Broadcasting Bill: A New Frontier in Censorship

The Broadcasting Bill, currently under discussion in Indonesia’s Parliament, seeks to expand the KPI’s oversight from traditional media—television and radio—to the digital realm, including social media platforms. The bill explicitly prohibits content that depicts “lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender behavior,” effectively targeting expressions of sexual and gender diversity online. This move is framed by lawmakers as a necessary step to align Indonesia with global trends in digital regulation, but critics argue it is a pretext for further marginalizing an already vulnerable community.

Legislative Context and Intent

Dave Laksono, a key figure in drafting the Broadcasting Bill, defends the legislation as a protective measure, particularly for children. He argues that regulating digital content is an extension of existing censorship practices in traditional media.

“It is our responsibility to build a control, make a filtering on social media, on information that children will receive,” Laksono stated in a recent interview.

However, this justification is met with skepticism by human rights advocates who see the bill as a tool for state overreach. The KPI, led by Ubaidillah, echoes Laksono’s sentiment, emphasizing that the bill aims to shield children from content that might “justify” non-normative behaviors. This framing reveals a deeper societal tension: the clash between conservative values and the push for individual freedoms in a rapidly digitizing world.

Scope and Implications

The Broadcasting Bill’s scope is expansive, covering not only user-generated content on platforms like Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok but also advertisements and digital media productions. Penalties for non-compliance range from written warnings to the revocation of broadcasting licenses, creating a chilling effect for content creators and platforms alike. The bill’s vague language around “LGBT behavior” raises concerns about arbitrary enforcement, potentially stifling free expression and targeting individuals based on their identity rather than specific actions.

A Broader Legislative Crackdown

The Broadcasting Bill does not exist in isolation. It is part of a suite of laws and regulations that collectively enhance state control over digital spaces and disproportionately affect the LGBT community. Two other significant measures—the new Military Law and a proposed police surveillance bill—further amplify these concerns.

The Military Law

Enacted in March 2024, the Military Law grants the Indonesian military unprecedented authority in the digital sphere. While the specifics of this law remain opaque, it reportedly allows military involvement in monitoring and regulating online content, particularly in cases deemed to threaten national security. For LGBT individuals, this introduces an additional layer of risk, as their online presence could be interpreted as a challenge to societal norms, thus attracting military scrutiny.

Proposed Police Surveillance Bill

Concurrently, a proposed bill would expand police powers to surveil internet activities and even shut down access entirely. This measure, if passed, would enable law enforcement to target specific communities, including LGBT groups, under the guise of maintaining public order. The combination of these laws creates a multi-pronged approach to censorship, where the state can monitor, restrict, and punish digital expressions of identity with alarming efficiency.

Historical Context: A Legacy of Discrimination

Indonesia’s current censorship efforts are not a new phenomenon but rather an extension of a long-standing pattern of discrimination against the LGBT community. The year 2016 marked a significant turning point, often referred to as a “digital repeat” by advocates, when anti-LGBT sentiment surged, driven by both political and cultural factors.

The 2016 Anti-LGBT Wave

In 2016, a censorship law targeting television and radio led to widespread job losses for transgender women in the entertainment industry. Kanzha Vinaa, a transgender woman and leader of Sanggar Swara, a non-governmental organization focused on transgender rights, recalls the devastating impact of this period.

“That year marked the rise of an anti-LGBT movement. Many LGBT people began to close their social media accounts due to relentless harassment,” Vinaa shared. “Comments on my accounts attacked my identity and even threatened my life, and they weren’t erased by the platform.”

Vinaa’s experience highlights a critical issue: the lack of platform accountability in addressing hate speech and threats against marginalized groups. Social media platforms, often seen as safe spaces for self-expression, became battlegrounds where LGBT individuals faced unchecked hostility.

Political and Cultural Triggers

Several factors contributed to the 2016 surge in anti-LGBT sentiment. The election of a non-Muslim, Chinese-Indonesian candidate to a prominent provincial leadership position sparked protests from conservative Muslim groups, who framed their opposition in moral and religious terms. Additionally, the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States in 2015 sent ripples through Indonesia’s political landscape, prompting lawmakers to adopt a defensive stance against perceived Western influences. These events unfolded under the administration of President Joko Widodo (2014–2024), during which censorship and criminalization of LGBT content intensified.

Nenden Sekar Arum, executive director of the Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network (SAFEnet), notes that the Widodo administration oversaw the blocking of 169 websites deemed to contain “immoral” LGBT content between 2016 and 2018. Popular platforms like Grindr and Blued were also targeted, effectively limiting the digital spaces where LGBT individuals could connect.

The Human Cost: Stories of Marginalization

The impact of these censorship policies is profoundly personal for Indonesia’s LGBT community. Advocates like Richa Shofyana, known as Chacha, who works with the Crisis Response Mechanism, describe a climate of fear and exclusion.

Chacha’s Story

In 2023, Chacha experienced a targeted attack when her name and old photos—taken before she began wearing a headscarf—were circulated on social media. She also lost access to her WhatsApp account, a critical tool for communication and advocacy. These incidents underscore the vulnerability of LGBT individuals in the digital space, where personal information can be weaponized to silence and intimidate.

Isa Zega’s Case

Another high-profile case involves Isa Zega, a transgender woman and social media influencer who faced legal repercussions under Indonesia’s blasphemy laws. In November 2024, Zega was named a suspect after posting content about her Umrah pilgrimage while wearing a headscarf. This case, occurring under the administration of current President Prabowo Subianto, illustrates the continuity of anti-LGBT policies across different leaderships.

Nenden Sekar Arum observes, “The current government is actually continuing [Widodo’s] works,” highlighting the persistent nature of these discriminatory practices.

Existing Legal Framework: A Web of Restrictions

Indonesia’s censorship of LGBT content is supported by a robust legal framework that has evolved over the years. Several key regulations enable the government to control digital and traditional media, often targeting sexual and gender minorities.

Pornography Law

The Pornography Law, enacted in 2008, criminalizes the creation, distribution, or sale of content involving “deviant intercourse,” a term that explicitly includes same-sex sexual acts. Violators face imprisonment, creating a legal basis for targeting LGBT-related content under the guise of combating pornography.

Regulation on Handling of Internet Sites with Negative Content

Since 2016, this regulation has empowered the government to block websites deemed to contain “negative content,” a category that encompasses both pornography and vaguely defined “illegal activities.” This has been used to restrict access to LGBT-related websites and mobile applications, significantly limiting online visibility for the community.

Indonesian Broadcasting Commission Regulations

The KPI has long prohibited representations of sexual and gender diversity in traditional media. A specific ban on content that “promotes” a homosexual lifestyle further narrows the space for positive or neutral portrayals of LGBT individuals on television and radio.

Regulation on Private Electronic System Organizers

This regulation mandates that digital platforms share user data, including sexual orientation preferences, with the Ministry of Communication and Information. Such requirements raise significant privacy concerns, as they enable state surveillance of individuals based on their identity.

Amendment to the Electronic Information and Transaction Law

An amendment to this law allows for the imprisonment of individuals sharing content deemed “against a norm,” a broad category that includes LGBT-related material. The vague wording of this law facilitates selective enforcement, disproportionately affecting marginalized groups.

Research and Hidden Truths: The Broader Implications

Research into Indonesia’s censorship policies reveals a complex interplay of cultural, religious, and political forces. Studies by organizations like SAFEnet and Remotivi highlight the chilling effect of these laws on free expression and the disproportionate harm inflicted on sexual and gender minorities.

The Chilling Effect on Free Expression

A 2023 report by SAFEnet documented a significant decline in online LGBT visibility following the 2016 website bans. The report noted that many community members self-censor to avoid harassment or legal repercussions, effectively silencing their voices in public discourse. This self-censorship is compounded by the lack of platform moderation, as seen in Vinaa’s experience, where hate speech went unaddressed.

Political Motivations

Political scientists argue that Indonesia’s anti-LGBT policies are often strategically deployed to consolidate power. By appealing to conservative religious groups, politicians can garner support while deflecting attention from economic or governance challenges. The 2016 protests against a non-Muslim candidate, for instance, were less about the candidate’s identity and more about mobilizing a conservative base to maintain political dominance.

Global Comparisons

Indonesia’s approach to digital censorship mirrors trends in other conservative-leaning nations, such as Russia and Uganda, where laws targeting LGBT content have been used to suppress dissent and enforce conformity. A 2024 study by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA) found that over 60 countries have laws restricting LGBT expression, with digital platforms increasingly becoming battlegrounds for these restrictions.

Resistance and Resilience: Voices of Defiance

Despite the oppressive legal and social climate, Indonesia’s LGBT community continues to resist. Advocates like Kanzha Vinaa are determined to reclaim digital spaces, refusing to be silenced as they were in 2016.

“At this point, I don’t want to make them able to silence me again,” Vinaa asserts. “So, whatever happens, I will stay in the digital space to reclaim the spaces, with all the risks that I am aware of.”

Organizations like Sanggar Swara and the Crisis Response Mechanism are also working to support the community, offering resources and advocacy to counter the effects of censorship and discrimination. These efforts are critical in a context where legal protections for LGBT individuals are virtually nonexistent.

The Road Ahead: Challenges and Opportunities

The Broadcasting Bill’s future remains uncertain, as it is still under discussion in Parliament. Yovantra Arief, director of Remotivi, predicts that lawmakers may rush to finalize the bill, following the precedent set by the Military Law’s sudden passage. This lack of transparency in the legislative process undermines public trust and limits opportunities for advocacy groups to influence the outcome.

Potential for Escalation

If passed, the Broadcasting Bill could significantly escalate the challenges faced by Indonesia’s LGBT community. The combination of digital censorship, military oversight, and police surveillance creates a surveillance state where individuals are monitored and punished for their identities. This could lead to increased self-censorship, reduced visibility, and further marginalization.

Opportunities for Advocacy

Despite these challenges, there are opportunities for resistance. International pressure from human rights organizations could influence Indonesia’s policies, particularly given the country’s aspirations to be a regional leader. Grassroots movements, supported by digital platforms, can also amplify marginalized voices, provided they navigate the risks of surveillance and censorship.

Conclusion

Indonesia’s push to expand censorship of LGBT content reflects a broader struggle between conservative values and individual freedoms. The Broadcasting Bill, alongside other restrictive laws, threatens to further marginalize an already vulnerable community, limiting their ability to express themselves and connect in digital spaces. Yet, the resilience of advocates like Kanzha Vinaa and organizations like SAFEnet offers hope for a more inclusive future. As Indonesia navigates its digital transformation, the world watches to see whether it will prioritize control or embrace diversity.