<![CDATA[Advances in digital technology have fundamentally transformed the nature of crimes involving children, while Indonesia’s juvenile criminal justice system continues to rely on the doctrine of doli incapax, a concept developed long before the emergence of the digital age. This article examines the contemporary relevance of the doli incapax doctrine, evaluates the inconsistency of age-based criminal responsibility under Law No. 11 of 2012 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, and proposes a normative framework that balances the protection of juvenile offenders with substantive justice for victims. This study employs normative legal research using statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches. The findings demonstrate that intensive exposure to digital environments has generated a cognitive–moral gap, in which children’s digital literacy and cognitive capabilities often exceed age-based assumptions underlying the doli incapax doctrine, while their moral judgment and emotional maturity remain underdeveloped. Consequently, the doctrine’s traditional presumption regarding children’s incapacity to understand the consequences of their actions becomes increasingly problematic in the digital context. Furthermore, the uniform age threshold adopted by the Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law may systematically contribute to secondary victimization by limiting accountability mechanisms in cases involving serious harm. This article argues that reform is required through the adoption of a tiered accountability model based on rebuttable presumptions, the enhancement of victim restitution mechanisms, the establishment of special diversion rules for juvenile recidivists, the harmonization of juvenile justice regulations with digital governance frameworks, and the development of child forensic psychology infrastructure as a prerequisite for effective implementation. These reforms are necessary to ensure that juvenile justice remains responsive to technological developments while maintaining a fair balance between child protection and victims’ rights.]]>
