<![CDATA[The development of information technology has changed the pattern of criminal acts, including the dissemination of immoral content through social media. These acts no longer only abandon conventional evidence but also produce various forms of electronic evidence that require special evidentiary mechanisms. The problems that arise are the position of electronic evidence in proving elements of a crime, the evidentiary strength of the testimony of digital forensic experts and Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE) experts, and how the perpetrators are held criminally liable based on the provisions of Law Number 1 of 2024 concerning the Second Amendment to Law Number 11 of 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions. This study aims to analyze the evidentiary strength of electronic evidence, the relevance of expert testimony in the evidentiary process, and the construction of criminal liability for perpetrators of the dissemination of immoral content through social media. The study employed normative legal research methods with a statute approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach. Data was analyzed qualitatively by reviewing the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), the ITE Law, Law Number 1 of 2024, and the investigative facts in a case of alleged distribution of indecent content via an Instagram account handled by the Special Criminal Investigation Directorate of the West Kalimantan Regional Police. The results of the study indicate that digital evidence in cases of crimes against morality on social media cannot only rely on the existence of screenshots but must be supported by a series of other electronic evidence, such as electronic devices, digital traces of accounts, metadata, witness statements, and expert statements explaining the relationship between the perpetrator's identity and the electronic activities carried out. Expert statements have an important function in explaining the fulfillment of the element "intentionally and without rights" as regulated in Article 27 paragraph (1) in conjunction with Article 45 paragraph (1) of the ITE Law, thereby strengthening the judge's belief in the validity of electronic evidence. The perpetrator's criminal liability is not only based on ownership of a social media account, but also on the investigator's ability to prove control of the account, use of electronic devices, a causal relationship between the perpetrator's actions and the distribution of content, and the existence of intent in distributing electronic information containing morality.]]>
