Digital Criminalisation: The role of Electronic Evidence in the 17 + 8 Demonstration

Emilia Metta Karunia Wijaya

Abstract


This article examines the role of electronic evidence and the practice of digital criminalisation in the series of demonstrations in response to 17+8 people's demands. The purpose of this study is to analyse the position of electronic evidence in proving criminal acts in the series of protests 17+8 of people's needs, the application of the ITE Law to the digital activities of the 17+8 demonstrations in the context of digital criminalisation, and the adequacy of legal norms in protecting freedom of expression in the digital era. The research uses a normative juridical method with a case study approach to examine the practice of digital criminalisation during a series of demonstrations. This study highlights an ambivalence in the use of electronic evidence. While it serves as a tool for accountability, it is also weaponized through the ITE Law's vague provisions to repress dissent. Consequently, Indonesia's legal framework remains focused on maintaining public order rather than safeguarding the fundamental rights of demonstrators. This article recommends reformulating the ITE Law's provisions on rubber articles, strengthening the implementation of the PDP Law, and establishing an independent institution to oversee the protection of personal data and digital restrictions.

Keywords


Electronic Evidence; Digital Criminalisation; ITE Law

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aditya, N., & Akanksha. (2024). Digital media and its aspects. Recent Researchers in Social Sciences and Humanities, 11(1), 40–44. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11001492

Andersen, I. (2022). Well, that is just my opinion: The principle of expression and the public debate. Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.958

Asimah, D. (2020). To overcome the constraints of proof in the application of electronic evidence. Jurnal Hukum Peratun, 3(2), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.25216/peratun.322020.97-110

Budhijanto, D. (2024). Revolusi cyberlaw Indonesia: Revisi UU ITE 2024, kedaulatan digital dan kecerdasan artifisial. Refika Aditama.

Dirjosisworo, S. (2018). Pengantar ilmu hukum (19th ed.). Rajawali Pers.

Fadilah, K. (2025, September 9). Setelah 17+8 tuntutan rakyat dibawa ke Senayan. DetikNews. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-8097215/setelah-17-8-tuntutan-rakyat-dibawa-ke-senayan

Fitriansyah, D. R. (2025, September 15). Pembatasan internet, represi digital ala pemerintah. Tempo. https://www.tempo.co/infografik/infografik/pembatasan-internet-represi-digital-ala-pemerintah-2066684

Gea, A. Y. (2024). Development of criminal evidence law in Indonesia. Legal Brief, 13(3), 768–779. https://doi.org/10.35335/legal.v13i3.1031

Harahap, M. Y. (n.d.). Pembahasan permasalahan dan penerapan KUHAP: Pemeriksaan sidang pengadilan, banding, kasasi, dan peninjauan kembali (13th ed.). Sinar Grafika.

ISO/IEC. (2012). ISO/IEC 27037:2012—Information technology—Security techniques—Guidelines for identification, collection, acquisition and preservation of digital evidence. https://amnafzar.net/files/1/ISO%2027000/ISO%20IEC%2027037-2012.pdf

Kharismaningtyas. (2025, September 12). Kawal tuntutan rakyat 17+8: BEM UI soroti penahanan demonstran, Yusril temui Delpedro Marhaen. Kompas TV. https://www.kompas.tv/nasional/616715/kawal-tuntutan-rakyat-17-8-bem-ui-soroti-penahanan-demonstran-yusril-temui-delpedro-marhaen

Kurniawan, Y. S. (2019, September 15). Tindak pidana elektronik miskin solusi. Hukum Online. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/tindak-pidana-elektronik-miskin-solusi-lt5d5e3d4e971fd/

Manila Principles. (n.d.). Manila principles on intermediary liability. https://manilaprinciples.org/

Mansyah, M. S., Suhartono, R. M., Salad, H., Dewi, R., & Bimasakti, D. H. (2023). Immunity rights of experts who provide statements in trials (Study Decision No. 47/Pdt.G/LH/2018/PN Cbi). The Digest Journal of Jurisprudence and Legisprudence, 4(2), 163–182.

Muhaimin. (2020). Metode penelitian hukum. Mataram University Press.

Mardianti, D. L. (2025, September 3). Kronologi demo memprotes DPR hingga meluas berubah penjarahan. Tempo. https://www.tempo.co/politik/kronologi-demo-memprotes-dpr-hingga-meluas-berubah-penjarahan-2065182

Negi, A., & Akanksha. (2024). Digital media and its aspects. Recent Researchers in Social Sciences and Humanities, 11(1), 40–44. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11001492

Prinst, D. (2022). Hukum acara pidana dalam praktik. Djambatan.

SAFEnet. (2025, September 13). Pernyataan sikap atas represi digital selama aksi Agustus 2025. https://safenet.or.id/id/2025/08/pernyataan-sikap-atas-represi-digital-selama-aksi-agustus-2025/

Siregar, R. A. (2025, September 8). Pengacara sebut aktivis Khariq Anhar yang ditahan Polda Metro dijerat UU ITE. Detik. https://www.detik.com/sumut/hukum-dan-kriminal/d-8096691/pengacara-sebut-aktivis-khariq-anhar-yang-ditahan-polda-metro-dijerat-uu-ite

Suryana, A., & Sakmaf, M. S. (2025). Can electronic evidence constitute sufficient grounds for criminal liability? Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kyadiren, 7(1), 587–601. https://doi.org/10.46924/jihk.v7i1.323

Xiang, R. (2024). Enhancing democratic governance: The crucial role of broad public participation in government public consultations. International Journal of Education and Humanities, 13(3), 254–256. https://doi.org/10.54097/P8AQY810




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31289/juncto.v7i2.6849

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2025 JUNCTO: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.