<![CDATA[The rapid advancement of information technology has rendered modern crime patterns increasingly complex, often eluding conventional investigative methods. In response, Law No. 20 of 2025 concerning the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP 2025) was enacted, formally recognizing wiretapping as a legitimate coercive measure in criminal investigations. However, Article 136 of KUHAP 2025 merely serves as an enabling norm, delegating the procedural specifics of wiretapping to a separate, yet-to-be-drafted statute. This delegation creates a significant regulatory vacuum. Through a normative-juridical method grounded in statutory and conceptual approaches, this study analyzes the legal implications of this procedural void—specifically its threat to legal certainty and citizens' guaranteed privacy rights. Furthermore, this research formulates the ideal substantive framework for the forthcoming Wiretapping Law. The findings assert that to safeguard against arbitrary surveillance, the new legislation must incorporate three essential elements: strictly defined limits on applicable criminal offenses, a rigorous judicial warrant mechanism, and definitive boundaries on wiretapping duration. Ultimately, these regulatory pillars are crucial for striking an equitable balance between the efficacy of law enforcement and the fundamental protection of human rights.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
