Anti-SLAPP as Hope for Justice

SLAPP was first discussed in the United States in the 1980s. As a response, the Anti-SLAPP mechanism was born, namely legal protection so that public participation is not paralyzed by lawsuits or criminalization. In Indonesia, this term appears in Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management (PPLH), specifically Article 66, which affirms that everyone who fights for the right to a good environment cannot be prosecuted criminally or civilly. However, in practice, this article is often ignored by law enforcement officials. Many cases show that citizens and activists are still being criminalized withvarious general articles, namely: Article 28 paragraph 2 of the ITE Law concerning hate speech, Article 406 of the Criminal Code concerning the crime of destruction, etc.In Daniel's case, the ITE Law article was used as a weapon against critical expressions about pollution and water contamination. This is a classic form of SLAPP: the right to speak is contested against legal power controlled by those with vested interests. PBHI calls Daniel's case a classic example of SLAPP, which demonstrates the inequality between reporters who have legal knowledge, wealth, and access to legal processes versus ordinary activists.Constitutional Court Decision Number 119/PUU-XXIII/2025if applied consistently, it could strengthen the position of Anti-SLAPP as a legal instrument that protects people like Daniel, so that environmental criticism is not immediately considered a criminal offense.