<![CDATA[The rapid digitalisation of criminal justice promises greater efficiency and accessibility but also creates procedural risks when technological innovation outpaces safeguards for individual rights. Despite expanding scholarship on digital courts, comparative evidence remains limited on how different institutional trajectories shape the relationship between judicial technology and procedural protection in emerging Asian legal systems. This study examines how digital criminal proceedings affect individual rights in Indonesia and Uzbekistan and identifies the institutional conditions required for rights-sensitive digital justice. Using a qualitative comparative socio-legal design, the study analyses legislation, judicial and policy documents, official materials, and relevant scholarly literature through thematic content analysis and structured comparison. The findings reveal contrasting trajectories: Indonesia combines relatively established digital judicial infrastructure with fragmented criminal-specific regulation, whereas Uzbekistan pursues a more centrally coordinated Digital Court transformation while procedural safeguards continue to evolve. Across both systems, electronic evidence, remote hearings, digital case management, and AI-assisted tools generate efficiency and transparency gains but also risks concerning evidentiary reliability, meaningful participation, digital inequality, and human oversight. The study conceptualises this mismatch as institutional asynchrony, providing a comparative framework for designing accountable, contestable, and rights-sensitive digital justice beyond technologically consolidated jurisdictions.]]>
