JAKARTA — A statement by Saiful Mujani Research and Consulting (SMRC) founder Saiful Mujani, which was deemed to be a call to impeach President Prabowo Subianto, has drawn sharp criticism from various groups. The narrative is considered to have crossed the boundaries of freedom of expression in a democracy and has the potential to encourage unconstitutional actions.
Cyrus Network founder Hasan Nasbi openly expressed his disappointment with the statement. Through his personal Instagram account, Hasan stated that the call to impeach a legitimate government does not reflect the attitude of academics who uphold democratic principles.
“I am forced to express my disappointment,” Hasan said on Monday (April 6).
In the post, Hasan included a video clip showing Saiful speaking at the “Halal Bihalal: Before Observers Are Disciplined” forum at the Utan Kayu Community in East Jakarta on March 31. In the video, Saiful alluded to the events of 1998 and emphasized that change only occurs with strong public support.
However, Hasan considered the statement to have strayed from the bounds of healthy criticism. He criticized the tendency of some who claim to be champions of democracy, but only accept the results of democracy when they align with their interests.
According to Hasan, criticism of the government is a natural part of a democratic system. However, calls to overthrow the government outside of constitutional mechanisms contradict the principles of democracy itself.
“Moreover, the person who expressed their desire to overthrow the president is a political science professor, a political consultant, and a pollster,” he said.
The Secretary General of the PKS Central Executive Board, Muhammad Kholid, expressed a similar view. He emphasized that criticism and demonstrations are constitutional rights protected by law, but must be expressed within the proper framework.
“In a democratic country, criticism is permitted and necessary. Demonstrations are also protected as a form of freedom of expression,” Kholid said.
However, he cautioned that attempts to overthrow the government illegally are unconstitutional. “Criticism is permitted, but overthrowing the government illegally is not permitted,” he asserted.
This controversy underscores that freedom of expression still has limits. Calls that lead to the delegitimization of the government outside of constitutional mechanisms are considered not only to be beyond the limits, but also have the potential to disrupt the stability of national democracy.
