<![CDATA[Smartphones are no longer merely communication devices but serve as massive repositories of personal data. However, a research gap exists regarding the normative boundaries between the seizure of a smartphone as a physical entity and the examination of its digital contents boundaries that remain undefined within the Indonesian criminal justice system. This normative legal study employs a methodological framework utilizing statutory, conceptual, case-based, and limited comparative approaches. Theoretically, the study contributes to the discourse on digital criminal procedural law by integrating data protection principles into the regulation of coercive measures. The findings indicate a fundamental distinction between the seizure of a physical device and the access to and extraction of digital data. Under the frameworks of the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP 2025) and the Personal Data Protection Law (UU PDP), the extraction of electronic data must be treated as a distinct object of search, requiring specific, relevant, and proportionate judicial authorization. Data extraction conducted without proper authorization constitutes an act lacking lawful authority. Furthermore, the study highlights a critical issue regarding legal loopholes in rights-remedy mechanisms; specifically, suspects lack adequate pretrial avenues to seek protection when irrelevant personal data is extracted, a stark contrast to the rights afforded to third parties. As a primary contribution regarding “ius constituendum” (law as it ought to be), the study recommends the implementation of a two-stage authorization model. This model mandates separate court authorizations for the seizure of the physical device and the extraction of its digital content, a requirement that should be reinforced through Supreme Court guidelines and strict standard operating procedures for investigators.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
