<![CDATA[This article aims to explore the conflict between the good faith values of press law and the criminal liability implications in journalism within the wide-open context of such vague norms as they exist in Indonesia. Right of legal protection for journalist was guaranteed by Law Number 40 of 1999 on the Press, but this law had no operational criteria concerning whether acts of journalism are carried out in good faith or not. The absence of consistently interpreting such rulings has resulted in confusion molding law enforcement agencies. They lack a universal definition, and would especially fall under defamation, false information and electronic communication offences. This article is primarily a normative juridical one, which, with the support of various research methods including statute, conceptual, case and comparative methods, aims to argue that the good faith should not be perceived as just an abstract moral value but rather as a legal doctrine that could limit the journalist criminal liability. This leads to the definition of signs of bona fides as reasonable verification, balance of sources, orientation towards public interest, lack of malice intention, journalistic precaution, and willingness to be corrected or right-of-reply. This article develops a model of press freedom law in Indonesia that could integrate journalism ethics with the criminal accountability of journalists. It argues that the prosecution of journalists should be a last resort and is only warranted in cases of "intentional falsity, actual malice, or reckless disregard for the truth". ]]>
