<![CDATA[Language can become the object of a legal offense when an utterance is judged to satisfy the elements of defamation, insult, or hate speech. Forensic linguistics serves as a bridge between language study and legal proof, by analyzing the form, meaning, intent, and function of utterances at issue in law. This paper examines two linguistically contrasting defamation cases in Indonesia: the Florence Sihombing case (2014–2015), which involved an explicit utterance posted on the social media platform Path, and the "Bau Ikan Asin" ("Salted Fish Smell") case involving Galih Ginanjar, Rey Utami, and Pablo Benua (2019–2020), which involved an implicative, metaphorical utterance. Using a framework of lexical-connotative semantics and speech act theory, this study shows that the role of linguistic analysis differs between explicit and implicative utterances: for explicit utterances, analysis serves to distinguish ordinary emotional expression from legally actionable insult; for implicative utterances, analysis serves to identify the hidden reference to the victim. The study also highlights the shift in Indonesia's legal framework following the entry into force of the new Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023) and the new Criminal Procedure Code (Law No. 20 of 2025) on 2 January 2026, which introduced stricter standards for evaluating expert testimony. This is a descriptive-qualitative study based on secondary documentation (news reporting and prior academic literature) rather than direct reading of official court records, and procedural details that could not be fully verified are flagged explicitly.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
