<![CDATA[The development of information technology in the early 2000s presented new challenges for Indonesia’s criminal justice system, particularly when Dani Firmansyah hacked into the General Elections Commission’s (KPU) National Tabulation System in 2004. This act was not explicitly regulated in the legislation in force at the time, placing judges in a dilemma between the obligation to fill a legal vacuum and adherence to the principle of legality. This study aims to analyze the legal reasoning employed by the judge in the Central Jakarta District Court Decision No. 1322/Pid.B/2004/PN.Jak.Pus, evaluate its consistency with the principles of criminal law and the principle of legality, and formulate a more appropriate legal reconstruction. The study employs a normative legal method using statutory, case-law, and conceptual approaches. The results indicate that the judge applied analogical reasoning regarding Article 406 of the Criminal Code and an extensive interpretation of Articles 22, 38, and 50 of the Telecommunications Law. This practice raises a legal dilemma because it has the potential to violate the principle of legality; however, Indonesian judicial practice shows that creative interpretation is often employed to fill legal gaps. The reconstruction of legal doctrine should emphasize a balance between legal certainty, justice, and public interest, using the Telecommunications Law as a more accountable legal basis.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
