THE CRIMINAL PROVISIONS OF DATA PRIVACY LAW AND ANATOMY OF CYBERCRIME LAW IN INDONESIA
Keywords:
cybercrime, defamation, hate speech, hackingAbstract
This paper will discuss the criminal provisions of data privacy law and anatomy of cybercrime law in Indonesia before the amendment of ICT Law and its implementation. During pandemic time, cyber incidents have increased over time. Indeed, cybercrime law in Indonesia regulates prohibition of hacking, phishing, illegal interception, carding, pornography, defamation and so on in accordance with the Electronic Information and Transactions Act (Undang- Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik, UU-ITE hereinafter also referred to as ‘Indonesia ICT Law), Law No. 11 of 2008 which later on revised into Law No. 19 of 2016 and currently became Law No. 1 of 2024. At the same time, Law No. 27 of 2022 (Personal Data Protection/ PDP Law) concerning data privacy protection also stipulated criminal provision and already used in case law. This law can be a part of cybercrime law system in Indonesia side by side with Indonesia ICT Law. Back to Indonesia ICT Law, the implementation of this law can be seen in 210 case law which I have collected and analysed in this paper. I have found that cases are dominated by online defamation, hate speech on social media, pornography, and extortion. Meanwhile, these cases are relatively similar with ‘ordinary crime’ which is regulated in criminal code. The high technological crimes such as hacking, phishing, illegal interception, carding, are less shown, hereby. The highest case number is online defamation which it was also triggered by some human rights activists sued to judicial review through the constitutional court to eliminate the article concerning online defamation. The reason of judicial review concerning online defamation is because this article may potentially oppress the freedom expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of press. The anatomy of cybercrime law in Indonesia still remains some problems in legal norms and legal practice.
Downloads
References
Angkasa (2018). “Legal Protection for Cyber Crime Victims on Victimological Perspective.” SHS Web of Conference 54 08004: 1–6.
Bjork, Christopher (2002). “Reconstructing Rituals : Expressions of Autonomy and Resistance in a Sino-Indonesian.” Anthropology&education Quarterly 33, no. 4: 465–91.
Castells, Manuel (2001). The Internet Galaxy: Reflection on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford: Oxford Unievrsity Press.
Cribb, Robert (2002). “Unresolved Problems in the Indonesian Killings of 1965 – 1966.” Asian Survey 42, no. 4: 550–63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/as.2002.42.4.550.
Douzinas, Costas (2007). The End of Human Rights? Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.54.1.23.
Lim, Merlyna (2013). “The Internet and Everyday Life in Indonesia : A New Moral Panic ?” Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia 169: 133–47.
M Irfan, MA Ramdhani, W Darmalaksana (2018). “Analyzes of Cybercrime Expansion in Indonesia and Preventive Actions.” 3rd Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/434/1/012257.
Marwan, Awaludin (2018). Good Governance and Ethnic Minorities in Indonesia. Utrecht: Utrecht University.
Mun Cheong, Yong (1981. “A Survey of Some Dutch-Language Materials on the
Chinese in Indonesia.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 12, no. 1: 27–37.
Prayudi, Yudi (2015). “A Proposed Digital Forensics Business Model to Support Cybercrime Investigation in Indonesia,” no. October: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijcnis.2015.11.01.
Siburian, Henry Kristian (2016). “Emerging Issue in Cyber Crime : Case Study Cyber Crime in Indonesia.” International Journal of Science and Research 5, no. 11: 2013–
16. https://doi.org/10.21275/ART20162818.
Suryadinata, Leo (2018). “Pre-War Indonesian Nationalism and the Peranakan Chinese
Author.” Asia, Southeast Publications, Program 11, no. 11: 83–94. Case law
Banjarmasin Court’s verdict Number 990/Pid.Sus/2018/PN Bjm. Bau Court’s verdict Number 158/Pid.B/2017/PN Bau.
Blambangan Umpu Court’s verdict Number 101/Pid.Sus/2018/PN Bbu. Constitutional Court’s verdict Number 50/ PUU-VI/ 2008
Constitutional Court’s verdict Number 2/ PUU-VII/2009 Constitutional Court’s verdict Number 76/PUU-XV/2017
Denpasar Court’s verdict Number 4/Pid.Sus/2018/PN Dps. Denpasar Court’s verdict Number 573/Pid.Sus/2018/PN Dps. Jakarta Court, verdict Number 326/ Pid.Sus/ 2017/PT.DKI.
Jakarta Court’verdict Number 350/Pid.Sus/2018/PT. DKI. Supreme Court’s verdict Number 574 K/ Pid.Sus/ 2018.
Tangerang Court Decision Number 1269/PID.B/2009/PNTNG on December 29, 2009 The Supreme Court Verdict Number 822K/ PID.Sus/2010 on June 30, 2011
The Supreme Court Verdict Number 225 PK/ PID. Sus/2011, on September 17, 2012.
Tarutung Court’s verdict Number 207/Pid.Sus/2018/PN Trt.
Kuala Kapuas Court’s verdict Number 109/Pid.Sus/2018/PN Klk.
North Jakarta Court’s verdict Number 1105/Pid.Sus/ 2017/PN Jkt.Utr. Medan Court’s verdict Number 8/Pid.Sus/2019/PT.MDN.
Mataram Court’s verdict Number 265/ Pid.Sus/ 2017 PN. MTR.
Online source https://megapolitan.kompas.com/read/2009/12/04/19465569/Koin.Peduli.Prita.Butuh.2.
5.Ton.Recehan, accessed on June 5, 2019, see also: https://keuangan.kontan.co.id/news/bi-koin-prita-terkumpul-rp-81094-juta-1 accessed on June 5, 2019
https://www.cnnindonesia.com/teknologi/20170426160647-185-210311/trojan-ini-bisa- bajak-transaksi-internet-banking-di-android, accessed on June 7, 2019. See also, https://www.cnnindonesia.com/teknologi/20170411160549-185-206712/manfaatkan- virus-ajaib-peretas-bobol-atm-di-40-negara?, accessed on June 7, 2019
