Digital Repression: The Rising Use of Disinformation Against Indonesian Civil Society

In the 18 months since President Prabowo Subianto took office, the digital landscape in Indonesia has become a primary battleground for civil liberties. According to a report published by Amnesty International, Indonesian authorities and state-aligned actors are increasingly deploying coordinated disinformation campaigns to silence dissent, discredit critics, and justify the repression of activists, journalists, and academics.

The Weaponization of Disinformation

The report, titled “Building up Imaginary Enemies,” details a systematic pattern of behavior where online slurs and false narratives precede real-world intimidation and violence. By labeling human rights defenders, protesters, and members of the press as “foreign agents,” state actors are effectively shifting public focus away from legitimate grievances and toward manufactured threats.

Agnès Callamard, Secretary General at Amnesty International, noted that these authoritarian practices have accelerated under the current administration. “Amnesty’s research shows that in the 18 months since Prabowo took power, online disinformation has emerged as a key tactic to systematically discredit government critics, shut down public debate and justify repression,” Callamard stated.

The Role of Social Media Platforms

A critical component of this trend is the role played by major technology companies. Amnesty International has explicitly identified Meta, TikTok, X, and YouTube as platforms that allow harmful, coordinated disinformation to remain online and proliferate. By failing to adequately moderate this content, these tech giants have, in effect, allowed their services to function as tools for political consolidation and the suppression of free expression.

The report highlights that this disinformation serves as a political weapon, deployed specifically when public criticism reaches a threshold that threatens the government’s power. The resulting chilling effect on society is significant, as the fear of being targeted online discourages individuals from engaging in legitimate activism and public discourse.

Key Findings and Implications

• Systematic Targeting: Disinformation campaigns are not random. they are a calculated tactic used against journalists, academics, protesters, and human rights defenders.
• The “Foreign Agent” Narrative: By branding critics with this label, authorities seek to delegitimize domestic dissent and portray activists as threats to national sovereignty.
• Offline Consequences: The digital attacks are frequently precursors to offline intimidation and physical violence, creating a cycle of repression that extends far beyond the internet.
• Corporate Responsibility: Major social media platforms are criticized for their failure to curb the spread of this harmful content, allowing it to undermine the democratic process in Indonesia.

Looking Ahead

The findings from Amnesty International underscore a growing crisis for civil society in Indonesia. As the government continues to consolidate power, the use of digital disinformation remains a primary challenge for those seeking to uphold human rights and freedom of expression. The international community and technology companies face mounting pressure to address these harmful practices to ensure that the digital space does not continue to serve as an instrument of state-sponsored repression.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main goal of these disinformation campaigns?
The campaigns aim to consolidate government power by demonizing critics, shutting down public debate, and justifying the repression of those who speak out against the administration.

Who is being targeted by these campaigns?
Targets include journalists, activists, academics, and protesters who express views critical of the Indonesian government.

How do technology companies factor into this situation?
Amnesty International reports that platforms like Meta, TikTok, X, and YouTube allow harmful disinformation to spread rapidly, failing to remove content that facilitates the intimidation of civil society members.