<![CDATA[The case of Baiq Nuril represents a significant precedent in Indonesia’s legal reasoning discourse, particularly in the application of Article 27(1) of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE). This article analyzes the judicial considerations of the Mataram District Court and the Supreme Court in Decision No. 574 K/Pid.Sus/2018 using a theoretical framework of legal reasoning, statutory interpretation, and substantive justice principles. The District Court acquitted the defendant, concluding that the elements of distribution were not fulfilled, there was no mens rea, and the recording was made solely for self-protection against sexual harassment. Conversely, the Supreme Court interpreted the act of handing a mobile phone to a colleague as “making electronic information accessible,” thus treating the defendant as having participated in distributing indecent content. The analysis shows that the Supreme Court’s reasoning is formalistic, disregards the context of victimization, and expands the scope of criminal elements disproportionately. This decision not only creates a chilling effect for victims of sexual violence but also highlights the normative weaknesses of the UU ITE, which is vulnerable to misuse. The article concludes that reconstructing statutory interpretation, applying proportionality principles, and reforming the UU ITE are essential to prevent the criminalization of victims. Accordingly, law enforcement in the digital era must prioritize substantive justice rather than mere formal legal certainty.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
