Election Disinformation And Regulatory Frameworks: A Comparative Analysis Of South-East Asian Countries

Abstract

Purpose: This comparative analysis paper aims to investigate the regulatory frameworks addressing election disinformation in three South-East Asian countries: Indonesia, Philippines, and Malaysia. The study seeks to identify the similarities, differences, and factors influencing the effectiveness of these frameworks, as well as to provide recommendations for strengthening them.

Methodology: The research employs a comparative legal research design, analyzing primary sources such as laws, regulations, and case law, as well as secondary sources including academic literature and research reports. The data is subjected to legal doctrinal analysis, comparative analysis, and thematic analysis (if applicable) to identify patterns, best practices, and lessons learned.

Findings: The comparative analysis reveals both similarities and differences in the regulatory approaches adopted by Indonesia, Philippines, and Malaysia to combat election disinformation. The effectiveness of these frameworks varies, influenced by factors such as the political will, institutional capacity, and level of media literacy in each country. The study identifies best practices and lessons learned from the experiences of these countries.

Implications: The findings of this research have important implications for theory and practice. They contribute to the understanding of how regulatory frameworks can be designed and implemented to address the complex challenge of election disinformation in the context of South-East Asia. The recommendations offered in this paper can inform policy development and guide efforts to strengthen the resilience of democratic processes against disinformation.