<![CDATA[The digitalization of public procurement has caused procurement activities to be recorded not only in conventional documents but also in the form of audit logs that chronologically record user activities. Although audit logs have significant potential as electronic evidence in corruption cases involving public procurement, their use still faces issues concerning authenticity, integrity, chain of custody, system reliability, relevance, and attribution of activities to the defendant. This study aims to analyze the legal position of audit logs as electronic evidence and reconstruct judicial assessment of their evidentiary value based on Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (New Criminal Procedure Code). This study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches through library and document research. The findings show that audit logs are recognized as electronic evidence, but their existence does not automatically establish the defendant’s guilt. Judges should assess the authenticity of the data source, data integrity, system reliability, chain of custody, relevance of the recorded activities, attribution to the defendant, and consistency with other evidence. This reconstruction can establish a more measurable assessment standard and reduce legal uncertainty in the use of audit logs in public procurement corruption cases.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
