<![CDATA[Indonesia has witnessed the rapid expansion of digital technologies alongside increasingly complex cybercrime regulation, yet conventional sanctions remain ill-suited to the distinctive persistence and recoverability of digital harm. Imprisonment and fines may establish accountability but do not necessarily remove harmful content, restore compromised accounts, repair reputational damage, or support victim recovery. Drawing on Indonesian positive law, Islamic criminal law, and restorative justice, this article employs normative juridical analysis to reconsider how cybercrime should be classified and sanctioned. We argue that most cybercrimes are more appropriately treated as discretionary offences (jarimah ta'zir) than as fixed-punishment (hudud) or retaliation-based (qisas) offences. Building on the higher objectives of Islamic law (maqasid al-shariah), we propose a tiered model of minor, intermediate, serious, and systemic cybercrimes. Central Java illustrations show that effective sanctioning requires aligning punishment with victim recovery, digital remediation, and recurrence prevention.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
