Talk:LGBT rights in Indonesia

Status of LGBT people serving openly in the military
For now the status of LGBT people serving in the Indonesian military might be de facto Illegal (even though no rules are officially placed against it ), since a few military officer have been sentenced to 7 months prison for doing same sexual activity. Also, being open about your sexuality might be frowned upon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:448a:2082:871d:7851:9147:d86:4906 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Summary Table
Before this turns into an all-out edit war, can and  reach a consensus in this talk page first before editing the article further? Please note that continuous disruptive edits could be reported to the admins per WP:3RR. Furthermore, I believe that this would help both of you to share constructive feedbacks to improve the article. For now I have reverted the page to the last version before the massive edits on 8 June 2022. Thank you. Cal1407 (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, there is no need to improve the article a bit further. The 8 June 2022 version was already good and adequate itself. It is true that LGBT people can not fully express themselves openly in Indonesia, but there aren't any case of where LGBT people are jailed bcs of promoting LGBT content. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 01:40, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Sexual orientation are not explicitly protected through the criminal code but in all other aspects of the criminal code there are protections which is stipulated through the Police ordinance 2015 itself. The Criminal code does not only not explicitly mention "sexual orientation" but other things like gender and women are also not mentioned in Indonesia's criminal code. This doesn't mean that women and gender minorities does not get any protection from the state. I'll make it a cross and check mark but I'll leave it to you if you want to revert it as before. https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/indonesia/2016/10/161019_indonesia_wwc_jokowi_lgbt Eustatius Strijder (talk) 07:39, 19 June 2022 (UTC)


 * False, there was at least one article where a group of LGBT people were sentenced to jail under the pornography act. I listed it in the edits and I can fish it back tomorrow I'm too tired to find it in the edits tonight. As I have said, I don't think any protections should be listed. We go by the laws not your interpretation of some lose fitting law about fairness of male and female Indonesians, if they do not explicitly mention sexuality or transgender people that means it does not apply to them and using common sense it would be easy to see that they won't be doing that anytime soon since Indonesia doesn't seem to like homosexuality. Also, we should keep legality of sexual and age of consent yes and no. I don't agree to your implication in your edit summary of how Aceh does its own thing just ignore it. They do enforce beatings, jailing and whippings in that area and whether you want to see it or not the laws there ban homosexuality as well. I can fish the source supporting that out of my old edits tomorrow as well. Since that is true, the age of consent is nullified in a place where the consent goes out the window and homosexuality is banned at all ages. Lmharding (talk) 05:27, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @: Please do not revert back to your preferred version. Discussion is ongoing, and according to the WP:BRD process, once your edits were challenged, you should leave it until discussion is complete. As the editor introducing new, contentious material, it is up to to seek and gain community consensus. Do not reinstate your disputed edits in the meantime, as you have done on so many LGBT pages, most recently at
 * LGBT rights in Uganda here (which is where you should have paused and discussed, but then went on and here and then and see here.
 * There's also
 * LGBT rights in Mauritius your additions, reverted here, which you changed back yet again, without discussion. And in the edit summary showing both misunderstanding of the source used, and that you do not understand WP policy. Even a red warning on your user page from that editor did not deter you, you just re-explained how you were right.
 * There are many other LGBT pages where you are battling to place your view in, and separate editors are all trying to reason or discuss the way forward with you. But you do not seem to hear. When you can't easily get your edits to stay, you move on to the next few LGBT pages, only to act the same way.
 * Why, may I ask, does your version have to be the one that stays there while discussion is taking place? That is not the policy.
 * Hopefully a consensus will be reached here. In the meantime, I have reverted the article to its pre edit-frenzy state. Leave it as is until discussion has ended, as Cal1407 says. Ask for community input if there is no consensus reached, but do not unilaterally insert your changes again.
 * And indent your posts, by using ONE more colon [ : ] than the previous editor used, but make sure there is no space at the beginning of the line. It will come out wrong if you leave the space, like yours above did (now fixed). AukusRuckus (talk) 08:31, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I concur. I feel that Lmharding is just trying to edit the article based on their own narrative and personal preferences. They have been doing the same thing to other LGBT rights articles of other countries as well. Furthermore, Aceh has already its own article on LGBT rights, so I don't think things that are related to LGBT rights in Aceh should be included in the main Indonesian article, aside from probably a few sentence regarding the legality of LGBT in Aceh. Cal1407 (talk) 11:07, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I disagree with @Lmharding intentions to edit the summary table related to cross check mark and equality of age of consent in LGBT rights page of Indonesia. I believe if soon Aceh become a partially recognized state, a disputed territory or even a country itself, he is free to edit that. But I believe that he is mostly biased, in every LGBT rights page related to developing countries or Muslim majority ones, he would make some sort of edits that seems to degrade or ostracize their own identities even further, rather than actually helping them through donations or real life support. This is also the same case for Turkmenistan and Turkey, last time he removed gender reassignment surgery allowance in the summary table of Turkey without providing a reliable proof and I had reinstated that again using references from websites https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LGBT_rights_in_Turkey&diff=prev&oldid=1093672609. The canings in Aceh are not verily in conducted in public eye anymore with jeering crowds like it was in 2017 and 2018, it is only done with minimum witnesses of religious officials, family members, and reporters only. https://aceh.tribunnews.com/2022/01/23/hukum-cambuk-dalam-lapas-dasar-hukum-dan-upaya-perlindungan-terhadap-anak?page=all. A series of prescribtions of "tortures, beatings, vigilante attacks, vigilante executions" will only make it worse to them, it will make them more liable to get the punishment like in the 2017-2018 year when there was no clear regulations for LGBT rights in Indonesia in the wikipedia. In addition, the government in Aceh does not allow vigilante executions to happen in violations of their own penal code, including to LGBT people because that haven't become a positive law in that territory. Someone who unlawfully murder an LGBT person will definitely get jail time in Indonesia, including in Aceh itself. Furthermore, the edits could prevent the central government to remove the bylaws in Aceh because it will create more political bias towards the repress of LGBT rights in Indonesia as a whole which could end up the central government and leftist parties to side with Aceh instead. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 11:55, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Legal status
Current infobox states status of LGBT as "legal". However, IMO the word of "legal" implies that there are law/act/regulation that explicitly allows it. Meanwhile AFAIK, there is no law/act/regulation that explicitly allow or prohibit LGBT. If we look example of status on Template:Infobox LGBT rights, the word "never criminalized" was used. Therefore, I propose to change the word of "legal" on status parameter to something else (unregulated, not specified or perhaps you have better suggestion?) Ckfasdf (talk) 12:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, sorry for the late reply. Imho, I do not really agree with your proposal. If you see this article, you can see that the legality of LGBT in African countries such as Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Djibouti, etc. are written as "Legal (No laws against same-sex sexual activity have ever existed in the country)". As you mentioned earlier, Indonesia doesn't have a law that specifically regulate LGBT activities. Therefore, I'm advocating for keeping the word "legal" for now, perhaps adding the phrase "(No laws against same-sex sexual activity have ever existed in the country)" behind it. Thank you. Cal1407 (talk) 14:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)


 * IMO, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not really strong argument to keep using the word of "legal". And if you look up the definition of "legal", every references that I look up said that it means something that is permitted by law (reference: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). And as I said earlier, since Indonesia don't have any law that specifically regulate LGBT activities, it cannot be considered as "permitted by law", so we can't say that is "legal". For time being, I propose to put as Grey area simply because no law regulates this issue at the moment. And for addition of phrase "No laws against same-sex sexual activity have ever existed in the country", It can be included in the body of article and it's a bit too long for infobox. Ckfasdf (talk) 22:39, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Everything that's not prohibited by law is legal. Being gay is like being left-handed. If there's no law prohibiting left-handedness so it's legal just like any other citizens in the society. There's no need for a law to regulate left-handedness or specifically targeting left-handed people. Springtime95 (talk) 13:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * there's no law regulating left-handedness so does it mean left-handedness is illegal? Springtime95 (talk) 13:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There's no law specifically regulating mangoes, cherries...doesn't not mean they are not legal. All sexual activities that are not prohibited by the law are legal. Springtime95 (talk) 13:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Everything that's not specified by law is neither legal or illegal. We can categorized something legal or illegal only if there is specific law that allows or prohibit it. Ckfasdf (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Everything that's not prohibited by law is legal. Springtime95 (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Being gay is like being left-handed. If there's no law prohibiting left-handedness so it's legal just like any other citizens in the society. There's no need for a law to regulate left-handedness or specifically targeting left-handed people.Springtime95 (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I disagree. As per @Springtime95, it is legal if no law is prohibiting it. Here is a Wikipedia article explaining that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_which_is_not_forbidden_is_allowed.
 * The other Wikipedia pages on LGBT rights also use the word legal even though there's no law permitting consensual same-sex sexual activity. Take Japan and Taiwan for example. StrategyFan (talk) 10:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Protect this page
Can someone protect this page to only registered users can edit this page? -GogoLion (talk) 03:27, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Legal's meaning
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/legal

the most widely used meaning of legal is "allowed/not forbidden by the law" in opposition with illegal. And there are expressions " de facto legal", "de facto illegal" meaning there's no law about it but in reality it's legal or illegal.

I know there are many homophobes in Indonesia but wikipedia is neutral.

Homosexuality, eating pizza, left-handedness, wearing make-up...is legal "Everything which is not forbidden is allowed" is a legal maxim. It is the concept that any action can be taken unless there is a law against it. It is also known in some situations as the "general power of competence" whereby the body or person being regulated is acknowledged to have competent judgement of their scope of action.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_which_is_not_forbidden_is_allowed#:~:text=%22Everything%20which%20is%20not%20forbidden,is%20a%20law%20against%20it. Springtime95 (talk) 02:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Refer to dictionary definition of "legal", (such: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5), which all of them consist of two word, the first one is "permitted/allowed" and the second one is "by law". When defining "legal", those two words are come hand in hand, you cannot just take the first word and ignore the second word, hence definition of "legal" is 'permitted/allowed by law', not only 'permitted/allowed'. The word "by law" means there has to be a regulation that regulate any word that comes before "by law". In order for something to be considered "legal", that thing is required to be explicitly mentioned in a regulation/rules/law/act that whatever that tings is allowed to do.
 * If you want to put 'legal' on the article, then you need to provide reference that there is a regulation/rules/law/act in Indonesia that explicitly allows LGBT. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * All activities that are not forbidden by the law is therefore allowed by the law. All law systems in the world say that. Springtime95 (talk) 03:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Activities that is not prohibited by law, is may be allowed to do but does not automatically translates to allowed by law. Please note that the key is "by law". Ckfasdf (talk) 03:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Show me a law that mentions about eating chewing gum or strawberries in your country. If not, does that mean that eating chewing gum and strawberries is not legal? Springtime95 (talk) 03:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The law established that citizens can do things that are not forbidden by the law. It's a fact in every country. That means it's legal. Springtime95 (talk) 03:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * all law say that citizens can do things that are not forbidden by law. So eating chewing gum, pizza or homosexuality is legal because it's not forbidden by law. Springtime95 (talk) 03:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Show me a law that mentions about eating chewing gum or strawberries in your country. If not, does that mean that eating chewing gum and strawberries is not legal? Springtime95 (talk) 03:03, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Without specific regulation to regulate something, we can not says something legal or illegal. Hence per definition, chewing gum and strawberries is not legal if there is no specific regulation. However, please note that just something is not legal doesn't means that thing is illegal. Again the key is "by law". Ckfasdf (talk) 03:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * So eating chewing gum is not legal? Springtime95 (talk) 03:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * assuming no specific regulation that regulate chewing gum, It is not legal, but allowed. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:26, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Eating chewing gum is legal because it's an activity that's not forbidden by the law. The law allows freadom to do things that are not illegal. There can't be 1 million laws targetting every human behavior. Springtime95 (talk) 03:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Again back to the definition, both word of "legal" (allowed by law) and "illegal (prohibited by law) are related law/regulation/rules. There are many activities that is not prohibited by law, hence makes it to be not legal, but still allowed to do. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * the law stated that humans have freedom and can do things that are not forbidden by the law. Therefore homosexuality, eating chewing gum, playing games are legal activities that are protected by the law of freedom and citizen's rights. They are de facto and de jure legal. Springtime95 (talk) 03:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Citizen's freedom is a legal right. Springtime95 (talk) 04:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * same-sex marriage in France is legal although there's no law specifically mentionning it. The law only say that people are free to marry the one they love, so it's legal. Springtime95 (talk) 04:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * same-sex marriage in France is legal because French President signed the law in 2013 (see https://www.refworld.org/docid/51a47a1818.html). Ckfasdf (talk) 04:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * the law is called marriage equality law that doesn't mention homosexuals or heterosexuals at all. It just stated that consenting adults are free to marry the one they love, meaning that both same-sex and opposite-sex marriages are legal. Springtime95 (talk) 04:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That french law is Loi n° 2013-404 du 17 mai 2013 ouvrant le mariage aux couples de personnes de même sexe (law opening marriage to same-sex couples, no. 2013-404). And in WP, we have article for that law (see Law 2013-404). Ckfasdf (talk) 05:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, it open the way to same-sex marriage by aborting the mentionning of opposite sex in the marriage law. It's gender neutral. It doesn't say anything about same-sex but people and lawyers understand that it include same-sex couples (by saying every consenting adults). The same for marriage in many countries that recognize same-sex marriage. they just don't mention opposite sex in the law. Springtime95 (talk) 05:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Err.. The title of law is quite explicit, law opening marriage to same-sex couples, I don't know why you insist to say that It doesn't say anything about same-sex Ckfasdf (talk) 05:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * how about the US? It has a gender-neutral marriage law. Springtime95 (talk) 05:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage is legal in France due to law opening marriage to same-sex couples, no. 2013-404, it's also legal in the US due to Supreme Court ruling. The same can not be said for Indonesia. Ckfasdf (talk) 06:01, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Estonia has passed a gender-neutral marriage law that doesn't mention gay people at all but it mean that all married couples are recognized.
 * https://www.riigikogu.ee/en/press-releases/plenary-assembly/the-riigikogu-passed-the-act-allowing-gender-neutral-marriage/ Springtime95 (talk) 05:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Springtime, you’re in danger of WP:BLUDGEON’ing here. You’re clearly passionate about this (especially looking at comments like this on a banned user’s page Special:MobileDiff/1192253636 ), but starting several different threads and being combative with other users doesn’t help us build an Encyclopedia. GraziePrego (talk) 05:32, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm discussing with ckfasdf who is pretty interested in this topic. My opinion is that homosexuality is legal in Indonesia.￼ Springtime95 (talk) 05:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that user were banned. I'm new to wikipedia. sorry. Springtime95 (talk) 05:36, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * everything that's not forbidden by the law is legal by the law. Show me a specific law about left-handedness? There will never be a law specifically mentionning homosexuality because homosexuality is a normal human behavior that's not something special.Springtime95 (talk) 03:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * the law established that citizens are free to do things that are not forbidden by it. So homosexuality is legal and protected by the law of freedom and citizen's rights.
 * https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/rightsof.asp Springtime95 (talk) 03:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The Riigikogu (Parliament of Estonia) passed an Act which provides that two adults will be allowed to contract marriage regardless of their gender from 1 January 2024. The Act had been declared to be a matter of confidence in the Government before its second reading. The implementing acts of the Registered Partnership Act would also be passed with the Act.
 * 55 members of the Riigikogu voted in favour of and 34 voted against passing the Act on Amendments to the Family Law Act and Amendments to Other Associated Acts (207 SE), initiated by the Government. Springtime95 (talk) 05:21, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The scope of the article is "LGBT rights in Indonesia". Use of the word "legal" to describe the "Status" of "LGBT rights in Indonesia" in the infobox makes no sense since "rights" cannot be "legal" or "illegal". The same applies to "Military". It's not clear what "Not explicitly prohibited by Law (de jure), Illegal (de facto)" means in this context. Is it being gay? Trans? Having non-heterosexual intercourse? I think the infobox should be removed from this article; it's more confusing than clarifying. voorts (talk/contributions) 04:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There are legal rights and not illegal rights. Springtime95 (talk) 04:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That's not how rights work. The statement "LGBT rights in Indonesia are legal" (which is what using "status" = "legal" implies) is nonsensical. You either have a right to do something or lack a right to do something. Rights themselves are not "legal" or "illegal". voorts (talk/contributions) 05:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * legal mean allowed by the law. There are rights that are recognized by law (freedom of expression, freedom of religion) but there are rights that are not (freedom to move in North Korea, freedom to kill, freedom to die...). Homosexuality is legal because it's protected by the law of freedom and citizen's rights which stated that people have freedom and can do what the law don't forbid. Springtime95 (talk) 05:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I know what legal means. The scope of this article is "LGBT rights in Indonesia", not "Homosexuality in Indonesia". So, it would make sense to say homosexuality is legal in Indonesia because it is not criminalized. It does not make sense, however, to say that "LGBT rights" are legal in Indonesia. For something to be "legal" it needs to be either expressly authorized or not prohibited; rights are entitlements to be treated in a particular way. Legality and rights are analytically distinct concepts. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * LGBT are also citizens of Indonesia so of course LGBT rights are legal citizen rights but at which level? LGBT rights are just like women rights or minority's rights. So you can say "homosexuality is legal in Indonesia" and homosexuality is a part of LGBT rights.Springtime95 (talk) 05:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * ping other user for more opinions
 * I'm with Springtime95 on this. I have brought up this issue to Ckfasdf a few months ago, and I have also brought up examples with other countries as well. Homosexuality is not criminalized in Indonesia, therefore it is de jure legal. Cal1407 (talk) 01:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * , I think we should refer to template documentation, the word "legal" is only applicable if there is any law the explicitly allows homosexuality, such as legal in France or legal in the US. In case of no explicit law regulate to prohibit it, the word "never criminalized" shall be used. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Of course another source of confusion is that in Common Law, something can be legal or illegal if there's relevant court precedent. But Indonesian law is predominately Civil/Continental.
 * Wex (LII (Cornell)) gives definitions for legal and illegal. The former in isolation is not a term of art -- they choose to give more space to the informal usages. The latter gets more technical: "illegal" is "any action which is against or not authorized by the law or statute." So it can be either by inclusion or by exclusion.
 * All this is to say I agree with the general objections of, that "legal" and "illegal" in isolation are not useful or well-defined terms for something like the lede sentence or infobox (until context is well-established), and that their alternative suggestions should be considered instead. SamuelRiv (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no law stating that homosexuality is illegal. So what is it then? DragonSign (talk) 06:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It simply means that if an act is not regulated by law, you cannot be prosecuted for conducting it... hence "never criminalized". Ckfasdf (talk) 01:15, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't you also use that word for Taiwan and Japan then? StrategyFan (talk) 10:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It's been 4 months since the last discussion. So, what's the decision? StrategyFan (talk) 10:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * replying to @Cal1407. StrategyFan (talk) 10:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)