<![CDATA[This study aims to conduct a normative-juridical analysis of the criminal offense of online gambling in Indonesia, specifically regarding the construction of criminal liability and the grounds for judicial sentencing of offenders. The study employs a normative-juridical method utilizing both statutory and case-based approaches. Legal materials were analyzed qualitatively to examine the relevant legal provisions and the considerations of the Panel of Judges in the online gambling case involving Pariyanto B. Siregar. The findings indicate that online gambling must be assessed based on the specific actions and the role of the offender, rather than solely on the use of technology as the medium for gambling. The defendant was proven to have actively accepted bets from others, placed bets via the "Puli Toto" account, managed payout settlements, and derived profit. The Panel of Judges opted for the Second Charge based on Article 303 paragraph (1) item 1 of the Criminal Code (KUHP), as the defendant's actions were deemed to satisfy the elements of offering or providing an opportunity for gambling and engaging in it as a livelihood. Criminal liability was established based on the defendant's capacity for accountability, the presence of criminal intent (*mens rea*), the fulfillment of all elements of the offense, and the absence of any justifying or excusing circumstances. A nine-month prison sentence was deemed proportionate, taking into account the defendant's role, the intensity of the actions, and aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The study underscores the importance of a systematic analysis linking actions, roles, culpability, evidence, and sentencing in the adjudication of online gambling cases.]]>
