<![CDATA[Freedom of expression is a constitutional right whose exercise has long faced challenges due to the ambiguous formulation of defamation provisions under the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE), commonly known as “rubber articles” because of their broad and flexible interpretation. Such ambiguity has the potential to criminalize legitimate criticism. This situation has shifted following Constitutional Court Decision Number 105/PUU-XXII/2024, issued on 29 April 2025, which limits the parties entitled to file complaints in defamation cases to natural persons and reaffirms defamation as a complaint-based offense. This study aims to analyze the legal reasoning of the Constitutional Court, the normative juridical consequences of the decision concerning the parties entitled to file complaints under the UU ITE, and its conformity with the perspective of siyasah dusturiyah. This normative legal study employs a descriptive-analytical method using statutory, conceptual, case, and sharia-normative approaches. Legal materials were collected through library research and analyzed qualitatively. The findings indicate that the decision strengthens legal certainty under Article 28D paragraph (1) and freedom of expression under Article 28E paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, while aligning the UU ITE with the 2023 Penal Code. From the perspective of siyasah dusturiyah, the decision is consistent with the principles of maslahah, musyawarah, hurriyatu al-ra’yi, and obedience to ulil amri within the limits of sharia. Its implementation nevertheless faces the absence of technical guidelines and challenges in proving the element of “real risk”, necessitating joint law-enforcement guidelines and comprehensive revision of the UU ITE.]]>
