<![CDATA[Law enforcement against online fraud in Indonesia continues to struggle with inconsistency in applying Law Number 1 of 2024 on the Second Amendment to the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (the EIT Law). Within the jurisdiction of Bandung City, only about 31.4% of 312 online fraud reports filed between 2021 and 2024 resulted in final and binding decisions, and the legal provisions applied varied considerably. This study analyzes the concrete application of the EIT Law at the indictment, evidentiary, and adjudication stages and identifies the factors driving such inconsistency. Adopting an empirical juridical (socio-legal) method with statutory and case approaches, the research draws on in-depth interviews with investigators, prosecutors, and judges, and on three Bandung District Court decisions examined through triangulation. The findings show that the application of the EIT Law is inconsistent: three substantively similar cases produced three distinct decision patterns, namely the sole application of the Criminal Code, the independent application of the EIT Law, and cumulative application. This inconsistency arises from four interacting factors: normative dualism between the Criminal Code and the EIT Law, the limited technical capacity of officials, weak institutional coordination and inadequate digital forensic infrastructure, and a legal culture favoring the Criminal Code. The study concludes that normative harmonization, technical guidelines from the Supreme Court and Attorney General's Office, strengthened digital forensics, and an objective and measurable model for determining the legal basis are required; the last constitutes the novelty of this research.]]>
