Police Complaint Case Code INF-001: Ranat Agung Randiyawan (English Edition)
This post summarises Laporan Aduan Masyarakat Case Code INF-001, a draft police complaint I helped prepare for submission to Polda Metro Jaya and/or Bareskrim Polri, on behalf of Mr. Gia Pratama Putra, over a public reply posted on Threads by an account he attributes to Mr. Ranat Agung Randiyawan. It is a complaint document, not a police report that has been filed, a court finding, or a determination of guilt. Mr. Randiyawan has not responded here, and I do not assert that he is guilty of any offence.
What the complaint is about
Mr. Putra, a doctor who posts under a verified Threads/Instagram account, replied to a public thread asking Meta AI when the 2029 general election would be held. His reply drew 48,200 likes and tens of thousands of interactions.
An account using the handle "@randiyawan__ranath" then posted a reply to that thread reading, in gist: "You'd be better off asking the doctor whether 2029 will be enough time for you to get your wife pregnant" — a public jab at Mr. Putra's and his wife's fertility, itself drawing 243 comments and 30 likes. Mr. Putra responded with a follow-up post — "With or without children, the two of us will still be happy" — which drew 4,600 likes and 745 reposts, which the complaint takes as evidence that the reply had already circulated widely as a public insult.
The complaint notes that, as far as could be established, Mr. Putra and the account holder had no prior relationship, interaction, or dispute of any kind before this exchange.
How the account holder was identified
The complaint identifies the account holder as Mr. Ranat Agung Randiyawan from a public social media profile using the name "Ranat Randiyawan," together with academic records reportedly showing an ITB Magister Administrasi Bisnis enrolment under that name (Student ID 29106030, enrolled 8 August 2006, later filing for withdrawal). I have no independent confirmation that Mr. Randiyawan operates the @randiyawan__ranath account, and the complaint frames this as the complainant's identification, not a proven fact.
Legal basis relied on
The draft complaint cites Indonesia's new Criminal Code (Law No. 1/2023) Art. 433 (defamation) and Art. 436 (light insult in public), aggravated under Art. 441(1) for use of electronic means, together with Art. 27A of the ITE Law (Law No. 1/2024) on electronic attacks on honour or reputation. It also names Art. 5 of the Sexual Violence Crimes Law (UU TPKS, Law No. 12/2022) as an alternative, secondary ground, at the complainant's request.
On that alternative ground, the draft is explicit about its own weakness: it records that the reply is, on its literal wording, a coarse joke about fertility rather than a statement primarily and consciously directed at the complainant's sexuality or decency in the sense the drafters of UU TPKS intended, and flags a real risk that investigators or prosecutors could decline to advance that element. It recommends that the primary, more defensible basis remain Art. 433/436 KUHP jo. Art. 441 KUHP jo. Art. 27A ITE Law.
What is being requested
The draft complaint asks Polda Metro Jaya and/or Bareskrim Polri to:
- Accept and register it as a formal police report;
- Summon and question Mr. Ranat Agung Randiyawan over the suspected offence of public insult/defamation by electronic means (Art. 433/436 jo. Art. 441 KUHP; Art. 27A ITE Law);
- Separately assess the alternative UU TPKS Art. 5 ground, with the caution noted above;
- Process the complaint according to applicable law.
Limits of this record
- This is a summary of a draft complaint prepared at a client's request, not a filed police report, and no authority has made a finding.
- The account holder was identified from public social media and academic-record screenshots supplied by the complainant; I have not independently verified them, and Mr. Randiyawan may dispute the identification.
- Quotations are English renderings of an Indonesian-language exchange.
- The complaint's own legal analysis flags the UU TPKS ground as weak; I have kept that caveat rather than omit it.
- I am not a party to this dispute, this post is not legal advice, and it does not assert that any offence occurred.
Right of reply and correction
Mr. Ranat Agung Randiyawan is invited to respond, correct, or add context. A substantive reply may be published alongside this article, edited only for privacy, safety and relevance. If reliable evidence shows any statement here is wrong, I will correct it and note the change.
#PoliceComplaint #Defamation #ITELaw #Somasi
Rahmat Wibowo, Founder & CEO, InfraLoka — infraloka.co.id