<![CDATA[This study evaluates the legitimacy of criminalizing insults against the President and Vice President under Articles 218–220 of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code through Douglas Husak’s theory of minimalist criminal law. The reintroduction of these offenses raises concerns about overcriminalization and restrictions on freedom of expression, particularly in light of Constitutional Court Decision No. 013-022/PUU-IV/2006, which invalidated the corresponding provisions of the former Criminal Code. This normative legal study uses statutory, conceptual, historical, and comparative approaches to examine the boundaries of punishable conduct, the complaint mechanism under Article 220, and possible reforms. The analysis combines grammatical, systematic, historical, teleological, and comparative interpretation. It argues that the phrase “attacking the honor or dignity” requires a restrictive interpretation that distinguishes personal reputational harm from criticism of public policy or official conduct. It also finds that the complaint mechanism is a procedural safeguard but does not, by itself, establish that a separate criminal offense is necessary, effective, or proportionate. Comparisons with the Netherlands and the United States illustrate alternative approaches to protecting reputation and public debate, although foreign standards cannot be transferred mechanically into Indonesian criminal law. The study proposes a staged reform agenda: prosecutorial guidance in the short term, statutory clarification and proportionality review in the medium term, and consideration of integration into generally applicable defamation provisions in the long term. It concludes that the legitimacy of Articles 218–220 requires stronger justification, clearer statutory boundaries, and safeguards for constitutionally protected expression.]]>
