Sandy Tumiwa recently issued a formal apology to Tessa Kaunang following her legal warning regarding AI-generated images that altered her appearance. The dispute, reported by detikcom, centers on the unauthorized use of AI to add a hijab to Kaunang’s likeness, sparking a broader debate on digital consent and the ethics of identity manipulation.
Why the Tessa Kaunang Dispute Matters for AI Ethics
Tessa Kaunang issued a public legal warning, known as a somasi, after her former husband, Sandy Tumiwa, uploaded AI-edited photos of her without her permission. The edits specifically added a hijab to her images, a move Kaunang described as a sensitive violation of her identity and faith.
According to statements made by Kaunang on the program Pagi Pagi Ambyar, the unauthorized edits could manipulate public opinion and negatively affect her family. She emphasized that as a public figure, being edited without consent carries even higher risks of reputational damage.
In response to the legal warning, Tumiwa deleted the images and issued a statement. He claimed his motivation was “appreciation and respect” for Kaunang as a mother, but he acknowledged that the visualizations caused discomfort. He stated he intended to honor her rather than diminish her, according to his social media post on May 16, 2026.
AI-generated “deepfakes” or synthetic media can now be created using simple mobile apps, making it increasingly difficult for individuals to distinguish between authentic photos and manipulated imagery without specialized forensic tools.
How Digital Consent Laws Are Evolving
The conflict between Kaunang and Tumiwa highlights a growing gap between rapid AI advancement and existing privacy laws. While Tumiwa framed his actions as a personal tribute, Kaunang’s legal stance focuses on the fundamental right to control one’s own likeness.
Legal experts suggest that this case reflects a global trend toward stricter “Right of Publicity” protections. As synthetic media becomes more realistic, lawmakers are considering new frameworks to address:
- Non-consensual synthetic imagery: The creation of photos or videos that place a person in a context they did not choose.
- Identity integrity: The right to prevent AI from altering a person’s religious, political, or social attributes.
- Digital defamation: When AI edits are used to spread misinformation or alter a person’s public character.
Comparing Perspectives: Intent vs. Impact
The dispute reveals a significant disconnect between the creator’s intent and the subject’s experience. This contrast is central to the future of digital regulation.
| Party | Primary Argument | Core Concern |
|---|---|---|
| Sandy Tumiwa | Personal appreciation and respect. | Artistic visualization of motherhood. |
| Tessa Kaunang | Unauthorized manipulation of identity. | Religious sensitivity and public opinion. |
The Risks of AI-Driven Identity Manipulation
Beyond personal disputes, the ability to change a person’s religious or cultural appearance via AI poses systemic risks. When an individual’s likeness is altered to reflect a different belief system, it can lead to social backlash or “identity theft” of a person’s values.
Kaunang noted that such edits can “steer opinions,” a sentiment shared by digital rights advocates. If AI can convincingly change how a person looks—including their clothing and religious symbols—it becomes a tool for sophisticated misinformation campaigns.
To protect your digital footprint, regularly audit your social media privacy settings and consider using watermarks on high-resolution personal images to discourage unauthorized AI training and manipulation.
What Happens Next for AI Regulation?
As more high-profile cases like this emerge, the pressure on tech platforms to implement “provenance” technology increases. Provenance technology uses metadata to track whether an image has been modified by AI, providing a clear trail of authenticity.
Industry analysts expect future regulations to mandate clear labeling for any content that has been synthetically altered. This would ensure that even if an edit is made out of “appreciation,” the public is immediately aware that the image is not an original photograph.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a ‘somasi’ in a legal context?
A somasi is a formal legal warning or notice sent to an individual to demand they cease a specific action or rectify a grievance before further legal proceedings are taken.
Can someone be legally liable for AI-generated edits?
Yes. Depending on the jurisdiction, using someone’s likeness without consent—especially to alter their religious or personal identity—can lead to claims of defamation, privacy violations, or infringement of publicity rights.
Why is changing religious attire via AI considered sensitive?
Altering religious symbols or clothing can be seen as a manipulation of a person’s core identity and faith, which can carry significant social and political implications.
What do you think about digital consent in the age of AI?
Share your thoughts in the comments below or subscribe to our newsletter for more updates on technology and law.
