- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
Legal & Ideological Studies
Fascism: Doctrinization, Prohibition, and Punishment under International Law and the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia
NKRI — Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia
Fascism is best understood as a political phenomenon that began as a movement more than a fully formed doctrine. In its early Italian form after World War I, it was anti-intellectual, action-oriented, and opportunistic. It presented itself as a revolt against liberalism, democracy, socialism, and communism, and it relied less on coherent philosophy than on nationalism, violence, mass mobilization, and a cult of the leader. Over time, however, fascism was codified, legalized, and propagated as an official ideology. That process of “doctrinization” became a tool of legitimation, indoctrination, and control. In response, international law and the national law of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia, NKRI) have moved to prohibit fascism and to impose sanctions for its activities and ideological dissemination.
I. The Doctrinization of Fascism
A. From Movement to Doctrine
The doctrinal codification of fascism is most clearly associated with “The Doctrine of Fascism”, published in 1932 in the Enciclopedia Italiana. The text is attributed to Benito Mussolini, but its philosophical sections were largely written by Giovanni Gentile. Its central ideas included the absolute primacy of the state: “Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” The individual was said to exist only through the nation and the state. Fascism embraced totalitarianism, one-party rule, one leader, and the suppression of pluralism. It promoted corporatism, in which class conflict would be replaced by state-controlled economic corporations. It treated imperialism and war as expressions of national vitality. It was anti-liberal, anti-democratic, and anti-Marxist, and it cultivated a mass cult of the Duce through ritual, propaganda, and spectacle.
B. Nazi Doctrinization and Common Features
German Nazism was a related but distinct fascist variant. Its doctrinal core included race and social Darwinism, anti-Semitism and exterminatory logic, the Volksgemeinschaft or “people’s community,” Lebensraum or “living space” in Eastern Europe, and the Führerprinzip or “leader principle.” Texts such as Mein Kampf, the Nazi Party program, and later the Nuremberg Laws helped codify this ideology. Across these variants, scholars such as Robert Paxton, Roger Griffin, Stanley Payne, and Zeev Sternhell have identified recurring fascist features: a myth of national rebirth after decline; an obsession with unity, purity, and internal enemies; a belief in the beauty of violence and militarism; charismatic leadership and mass propaganda; anti-intellectualism mixed with pseudo-philosophical justification; expansionism and imperialism; and the suppression of dissent, free press, unions, and opposition parties.
C. How Doctrinization Worked
Doctrinization was never a neutral philosophical exercise. It functioned as legitimation for dictatorial power, as indoctrination through schools, youth groups, media, and rallies, as mobilization of mass support, as control through the definition of enemies and loyalty, and as aesthetic politics expressed in symbols, uniforms, parades, hymns, and spectacle. Yet fascism was often deliberately anti-doctrinal in practice. It valued action, myth, and will over consistent theory. Its “doctrine” was frequently contradictory and constructed after the fact. Doctrinization should therefore be understood as a propaganda and legitimization process, not as a rigorous philosophical system comparable to Marxism or liberalism.
II. Forbiddance by International Law and the NKRI
A. Prohibition under International Law
Because of this history, fascism is not merely an object of academic study; it is also an object of legal prohibition. Under international law, fascism in all its forms and manifestations is explicitly condemned and forbidden. The United Nations General Assembly, through various resolutions, has consistently condemned all totalitarian ideologies and practices, including Nazi, Fascist, and neo-Fascist ideologies, which are based on racial, ethnic, or other exclusivism, hatred, and terror, and which deprive people of human rights and fundamental freedoms. These resolutions are not merely declaratory. They call upon all states to consider taking measures to prohibit or prevent the activities of groups or organizations that practice such ideologies. More operationally, states are asked to adopt, in accordance with their national constitutional systems and with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenants on Human Rights, measures that make punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred and all war propaganda, including Nazi, Fascist, and neo-Fascist ideology.
Within the framework of human rights law, Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) requires states parties to prohibit by law any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has emphasized that the reorganization of a dissolved fascist party falls outside the protection of the Covenant by operation of Article 5, which prevents abuse of rights. The Rome Statute of 1998, which established the International Criminal Court, further criminalizes conduct characteristic of fascist regimes, including crimes against humanity under Article 7, such as persecution against identifiable groups on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, or gender grounds. International law therefore does not merely prohibit the dissemination of fascist ideology; it also demands criminal accountability for the crimes that arise from its practice.
B. Prohibition under NKRI Law
In the context of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, the prohibition of ideologies contrary to the state foundation has a strong constitutional basis. Pancasila, as affirmed by the Constitutional Court, is the foundation of the state and the ideology of the state, a foundational consensus of the Indonesian nation and the existential basis of the NKRI. Consequently, any ideology that aims to replace or alter Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution is prohibited. This prohibition is not contrary to the 1945 Constitution; rather, it must be understood as a constitutional obligation of the state derived from the mandate of the fourth paragraph of the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution.
Operationally, this prohibition is embodied in several criminal and statutory provisions. Article 107 of the old Criminal Code addresses treason with the intent to overthrow the government and carries a maximum penalty of fifteen years’ imprisonment. In the New Criminal Code, Law No. 1 of 2023, Article 190 provides a more specific basis. Article 190(1) states that any person who publicly declares, by speech, writing, or any media, the intention to eliminate or replace Pancasila as the state foundation shall be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of five years. Article 190(2) increases the penalty if the act causes public disturbance or loss of property, with a maximum of ten years; if it causes serious injury, with a maximum of twelve years; and if it causes death, with a maximum of fifteen years. This graduated structure treats the dissemination of prohibited ideology not only as an offense against the state foundation but also as a crime capable of producing victims and material harm.
The Mass Organizations Law further provides heavier sanctions for organizational activity that disseminates prohibited ideology. Article 59(4)(c) of the Mass Organizations Law states that “teachings or ideologies contrary to Pancasila” include, among others, atheism, communism/Marxism-Leninism, or other ideologies that aim to replace or alter Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. The phrase “other ideologies” legally encompasses fascism and neo-fascism, because both fundamentally aim to replace the state foundation and the ideology of Pancasila.
III. Sanction and Punishment for Fascism Activity and Ideology Dissemination
A. Sanctions in International Law
At the international level, sanctions and punishment are likewise required. The United Nations General Assembly has not only condemned fascism but has urged states to prohibit or prevent the activities of groups and organizations that practice such ideologies. It has invited member states to adopt measures making punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred and all war propaganda. Under Article 20 of the ICCPR, states must prohibit propaganda for war and incitement to hatred. The Human Rights Committee has stressed that for Article 20 to be fully effective, there must be laws declaring such propaganda and advocacy contrary to state policy and providing adequate sanctions for violations.
At the level of individual criminal responsibility, the Rome Statute provides a basis for prosecuting and punishing crimes born of fascist ideology. Article 7 covers crimes against humanity, including persecution against identifiable groups. International jurisprudence, especially from the Nuremberg trials, demonstrates that crimes against humanity consisting of systematic inhuman acts against a civilian population in the name of a state policy based on ideological supremacy are punishable. Nazi leaders were sentenced to death or imprisonment, including Rosenberg and Frick, who received death sentences, while Speer received twenty years’ imprisonment.
B. Sanctions in NKRI Law and Their Convergence with International Law
Article 82A(2) of the Mass Organizations Law imposes a penalty of life imprisonment or a term of imprisonment of at least five years and at most twenty years on members or officials of a mass organization who intentionally, directly or indirectly, adopt and disseminate an ideology contrary to Pancasila. This provision has been applied in judicial practice. Bekasi District Court Decision No. 597/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Bks, for example, sentenced defendants to five years’ imprisonment after they were proven to have jointly served as officials of a mass organization that adopted, developed, and disseminated teachings or ideologies contrary to Pancasila. This decision shows that criminal sanctions for the dissemination of prohibited ideology, including fascism, are not merely written norms but have concrete judicial precedent.
There is therefore a clear convergence between the sanctioning obligations of international law and the criminal sanctions of Indonesian national law. International law, through United Nations General Assembly resolutions, requires states to make punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, which is central to fascist ideology. Indonesia has transformed this obligation into domestic law through Article 190 of the New Criminal Code, which punishes the dissemination of an ideology replacing Pancasila, and through Article 82A(2) of the Mass Organizations Law, which punishes the dissemination of prohibited ideology by mass organizations. The combination of penalties—up to life imprisonment under the Mass Organizations Law, up to twenty years for organizational dissemination, up to fifteen years under the New Criminal Code when death results, and the possibility of life imprisonment in organizational cases—shows that the NKRI regards the dissemination of fascism as a serious threat to the existence of the state and to human rights, in line with international standards.
IV. Conclusion
In conclusion, fascism was never merely a spontaneous political mood. It was doctrinized, codified, and propagated as a totalitarian ideology that subordinated the individual to the state, glorified violence, and cultivated a myth of national rebirth. International law and the national law of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia have responded with a shared logic: prohibition, prevention, and punishment. International instruments condemn fascism, require states to criminalize its dissemination, and provide mechanisms for accountability for crimes against humanity. Indonesian law, rooted in Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution, prohibits any ideology that seeks to replace or alter the state foundation and imposes severe criminal sanctions on those who disseminate it, whether individually or through mass organizations.
The legal order of the NKRI thus treats fascism not as a protected expression but as an anti-Pancasila, anti-constitutional, and criminal threat to democracy, human rights, and the existence of the state.
End of Document • Forbiddance by International Law-Code and NKRI
Comments