Developing A Legal Framework of Personal Data Protection in the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Law

Searching and seizing voluminous data is a challenge that Indonesian law enforcement authorities should resolve. Indonesia does not have a comprehensive regime on personal data protection. The absence of a coherent legal framework on personal data protection does not negate the obligation of Indonesian law enforcement authorities to protect personal data of Indonesian subjects. However, the absence of the framework may lead to uncertainties or ambiguities on how the authorities should protect personal data. Against the uncertainties and ambiguities, Indonesian law enforcement authorities should resolve issues of voluminous data in obtaining e-information with the prevailing legislation. This article attempts to answer the question: how may Indonesian law enforcement authorities interpret the current law to establish a coherent legal framework to protect personal data in searching or seizing voluminous data? The interpretation is instrumental in supporting the development of the Indonesian regime on personal data protection. It proposes that the Indonesian criminal procedure law should emphasise the active role of the chief judges of competent district courts and should incorporate specificity and proportionality as conditions and safeguards in the execution of search and seizure of electronic evidence.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v9n3.582

I appreciate comments that you send to josua.sitompul@cyberlaw.id. I will try to respond to them.

Improving the Role of Experts Under Indonesian Criminal Procedure Law: Lessons Learned From the Dutch Legal System

This article attempts to scrutinize the role of an expert under the Indonesian Criminal Procedure (KUHAP) and examine how Indonesian courts have interpreted and applied relevant rules and principles of the expert in selected cybercrime cases. It finds that the main role of an expert in such cases is providing the courts with opinions on the legal and technical meanings of the legal provisions at stake and their contextualization in the cases. This raises the question whether law enforcement agencies comprehend the execution of the provisions. It also shows that law enforcement agencies are not always interested in getting digital forensic examination from which electronic evidence may be produced. It emphasizes that role of an expert under KUHAP is equivocal and views the need to improve the role and principles. In order to improve the role of experts under Indonesian criminal law, the article describes and explains the salient features of expert evidence under Dutch law. The article concludes by making a series of recommendations.

For further reading:

Improving the Role of Experts Under the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Law

If you have comments, you may send them to josua.sitompul@cyberlaw.id. I would try to respond to them.

Citizen Jurnalism

Konstitusi Indonesia melindungi kebebasan berekspresi dan mengemukakan pendapat, termasuk memperoleh dan mendiseminasi informasi dengan menggunakan berbagai jenis teknologi yang ada. Yang dimaksud dengan informasi tidak hanya berupa berita tetapi juga pendapat atau opini seseorang.

Pasal 28 F Undang-Undang Dasar 1945:

Setiap orang berhak untuk berkomunikasi dan memperoleh informasi untuk mengembangkan pribadi dan lingkungan sosialnya, serta berhak untuk mencari, memperoleh, memiliki, menyimpan, mengolah, dan menyampaikan informasi dengan menggunakan segala jenis saluran yang tersedia.

Seseorang yang memiliki website pribadi dan ia mendiseminasi informasi baik berita maupun opini melalui websitenya tersebut untuk kepentingan berbagi (sharing) tidak memerlukan izin atau tidak ada kewajiban untuk memiliki badan hukum. Kegiatan seperti ini dapat dikategorikan sebagai citizen journalism. Continue reading →

Merekam Pembicaraan Tanpa Izin

Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (“UU ITE”) pada dasarnya memuat dua bagian besar pengaturan:

1.    Pengaturan mengenai sistem dan transaksi elektronik;

2.    Pengaturan mengenai tindak pidana siber yang mencakup hukum materil dan hukum formil.

Pengaturan tindak pidana siber dalam konteks hukum materil mengacu pada Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime, 2001.

Pasal 31 UU ITE mengatur mengenai intersepsi ilegal, sebagai berikut. Continue reading →

Tanggung Jawab Penyelenggara Sistem Elektronik

Salah satu tema mendasar dari Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (“UU ITE”) serta Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 82 Tahun 2012 tentang Penyelenggaraan Sistem dan Transaksi Elektronik (“PP PSTE”) adalah bagaimana membangun Sistem Elektronik yang andal, aman, dan beroperasi sebagaimana mestinya. Hal ini penting karena dalam UU ITE dan PP PSTE, Penyelenggara Sistem Elektronik harus bertanggung jawab terhadap beroperasinya Sistem Elektronik yang diselenggarakannya. Continue reading →