Indonesia

Courts

Indonesia has undertaken a programme of judicial digitalisation, including the introduction of the Supreme Court’s e-Court system for electronic filing, payments and case administration, and the e-Litigation system for online hearings and document exchange. Building on this digital infrastructure, Indonesia has begun to slowly integrate AI into its courts.

Case management

Smart Majelis is an AI-assisted case handling system developed by the Supreme Court of Indonesia. It functions to automate the selection of panels of judges by their case type, judicial expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and case complexity. Smart Majelis has been integrated with the Supreme Court’s case management information system, functioning to provide recommendations on panel composition to the Chairman of the Supreme Court or the relevant chamber. Smart Majelis is also integrated in the case tracking information systems at the first instance and appellate levels.

Defence

Legal research, analysis and drafting support

Lawyers in Indonesia use publicly available AI platforms, including ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Gemini. Such platforms are used to translate documents, draft legal instruments, summarise documents, and brainstorm legal analysis.

Victims

Under the I (Law No. 20 of 2025), victims have direct procedural rights, although only the Public Prosecutor (Penuntut Umum) may conduct the prosecution itself. Article 144 sets out a dedicated list of victim rights, including Restitution, participation in restorative justice, accompaniment (Pendamping) at every stage of proceedings, and the right to submit a written or oral victim impact statement under Article 144. Victims may also bring pre-trial (Praperadilan) applications under Articles 161 to 162, and courts must consider victim interests in specific contexts, including any peace agreement offered as a mitigating factor at sentencing under Article 204.

However, as at July 2026, there are no reported cases of victims using AI in criminal proceedings in Indonesia.

TRAINING

As at July 2026, there is no mandatory, systematic training available for Indonesian law enforcement, prosecutors, courts, or lawyers, on the responsible use of AI in legal proceedings. Instead, training is offered on an ad hoc basis, through institutional workshops or joint programmes.

For judges and court personnel, in November 2025 the Supreme Court of Indonesia sent a delegation to attend UNESCO-hosted training on AI and the Rule of Law for Southeast Asian Member States, held in Bangkok. During the training, judges and court officials from the Asia-Pacific countries discussed issues including access to justice, judicial efficiency, transparency, human oversight, accountability, and the need for safeguards against bias and unfairness in AI-assisted decision-making.

For prosecutors, the Central Executive Board of the Indonesian Prosecutors Association (Pengurus Pusat Persatuan Jaksa Indonesia) reportedly held an online AI Training Workshop in August 2025, emphasising the importance of collaboration between AI technology companies and prosecutors. The workshop was intended to improve understanding and use of AI and to serve as an initial step towards integrating AI into law enforcement work processes, including data analysis, case handling, and the enhancement of digitally based public services. Moreover, in December 2025, the Attorney General’s Office held a nationwide ‘AI and Big Data Training Programme’ for prosecutors handling general criminal cases. The training was directed at prosecutors and operators of the Case Management System across Indonesia.

For defence counsel and lawyers, AI-related training is driven mainly by ad hoc sessions held by bar associations. For example, Peradi-SAI (an Indonesian bar association) has held a seminar entitled ‘The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law Enforcement in Indonesia’, which included discussions on the growing expectation that lawyers become more AI-literate, and aimed to equip association members with knowledge and insights relating to AI.

REGULATION

As at July 2026, Indonesia does not have a dedicated AI framework. The applicable framework is instead scattered across generally applicable legislation concerning electronic systems, personal data protection, consumer protection, and human rights, as well as soft-law instruments.

AI regulations

As at July 2026, Indonesia has not adopted a comprehensive and binding regulatory framework governing the use of AI, including its application in criminal proceedings or judicial processes. Instead, the regulation of AI in Indonesia is limited to soft-law instruments, which primarily function as non-binding guidelines and do not provide for sanctions or enforcement mechanisms. Such soft-law instruments are issued by supervisory or regulatory institutions within specific sectors, and apply only as guidance for the implementation and use of AI by business actors operating in those respective sectors.

Indonesia is, however, a member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (‘ASEAN’), which has released its own set of Guidelines on AI Governance and Ethics (2024). Nevertheless, the Guidelines merely serve as a practical reference for organisations operating within the ASEAN region. The Guidelines’ primary objective is to encourage regulatory alignment across ASEAN member states and to promote the interoperability of AI governance frameworks among ASEAN jurisdictions.

Accordingly, the Guidelines do not constitute a legally binding instrument and do not impose mandatory obligations on ASEAN member states or organisations operating within ASEAN.

Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs, Circular Letter 9/2023

The Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs Circular Letter 9/2023 functions as a non-binding guideline for AI use in Indonesia. It addresses the ethical principles expected to govern AI-related activities by business actors and electronic system operators. The guidance signals the government’s expectation that AI must generally be deployed in a manner that is socially responsible, non-discriminatory, transparent in its data practices, and legally accountable for its effects. The circular identifies nine core ethical values:

1. Inclusivity: the implementation of AI must respect the values of equality and justice.
2. Humanity: the implementation of AI must respect humanitarian values by maintaining human rights, social relationships, beliefs, and opinions or thoughts of individuals.
3. Security: the implementation of AI must respect the security of users and maintain data in a way that ensures respect for privacy and prioritises the rights of users so that no party is harmed.
4. Accessibility: AI services should be inclusive and non-discriminatory. Every user has the same right to access AI-based technology for their own benefit, in accordance with applicable ethical principles for AI.
5. Transparency: transparency in the implementation of AI must be based on data transparency to prevent misuse of data in developing technological innovations.
6. Credibility and Accountability: information generated through AI must be trustworthy and accountable when disseminated to the public.
7. Personal Data Protection: AI providers must ensure the protection of personal data in accordance with statutory provisions.
8. Sustainable Development and Environment: the implementation of AI must consider the impacts on humans, the environment, and other living things, to achieve sustainability and social welfare.
9. Intellectual Property: the implementation of AI is subject to intellectual property rights protections, in accordance with the provisions of law and regulations.

In addition to the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs Circular Letter 9/2023, other soft law instruments have been adopted in specific sectors, such as AI in journalism (Press Council Regulation 1/2025) and education (Joint Decree on AI in Education 2026).

Guidelines for practitioners

As at July 2026, there are no guidelines for Indonesian practitioners on the responsible use of AI in criminal proceedings. The most relevant applicable instrument specifically addressing AI is the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs Circular Letter 9/2023 (discussed above) and subsequent ethical guidelines issued for the Financial Services Authority and Financial Technology. Indonesia has not formally adopted the UNESCO Guidelines for the Use of AI Systems in Courts and Tribunals (2025).

Criminal procedure rules

Law No. 20 of 2025 on Criminal Procedural Code, 2025

The Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code serves as the foundational framework governing criminal proceedings in Indonesia, having replaced Law No. 8 of 1981. The Code entered into force in February 2026, and regulates the conduct of criminal investigations, prosecutions, trials, and the admissibility of evidence. Although the Criminal Procedural Code does not expressly address the use of AI‑generated or AI‑assisted evidence, it reflects a modernisation of Indonesia’s procedural system by expressly recognising the admissibility of electronic evidence in criminal proceedings. As a result, any materials derived from or reviewed using AI that are submitted in criminal cases must be evaluated in accordance with the general rules of criminal procedure and evidence law, including assessments of legality, authenticity, reliability, and probative value.

Legality concerns the manner in which AI-related materials are obtained. If such materials are to be used as evidence by law enforcement authorities, they must generally be acquired through lawful search or seizure procedures conducted in accordance with Articles 112 to 135 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedural Code.

Authenticity and probative value relate to the reliability and evidentiary weight of the materials in court proceedings. Under Article 235 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedural Code, electronic evidence and documentary evidence are recognised forms of evidence, provided that their authenticity can be verified and they are obtained lawfully. Courts have the authority to assess both the authenticity of the evidence and the legality of the manner in which it was obtained.

Article 239 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedural Code further recognises several categories of documentary evidence, including official records and documents issued by authorised public officials, documents created pursuant to statutory requirements, expert opinions, and other documents that are relevant to supporting evidence. In addition, Article 242 provides that electronic evidence may include any electronic information, electronic documents, and/or electronic systems related to a criminal offence.

Indonesian criminal law does not require any explicit obligation to disclose exculpatory and incriminating evidence.

Deepfakes and synthetic materials

The Indonesian Criminal Code expressly prohibits the tampering or fabrication of evidence to be used in the trial process. Article 278 of the Criminal Code provides that the falsification, fabrication, or submission of false evidence constitutes an obstruction of justice and is punishable by up to six years of imprisonment or fines. In addition, Article 235(3)-(5) of the Criminal Procedural Code requires that evidence must be capable of authentication and must be obtained lawfully in order to be admissible as evidence with probative value in criminal proceedings. This provision implicitly excludes evidence that has been tampered with or unlawfully manipulated.

Data protection legislation

Law No. 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection, 2022

In Indonesia, the operation of an AI platform must be assessed against the nation’s Personal Data Protection Law, which entered into force in October 2024. Where AI tools are used in the criminal justice system and process personal data, they must comply with the Personal Data Protection Law and, potentially, other sectoral rules.

The Law is closely aligned with international data privacy standards, and is largely modelled on the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation. It places significant responsibilities on ‘data controllers’ (those determining how AI is used) and ‘data processors’ (those handling data on behalf of controllers). Key obligations include: respecting individuals’ rights to access, correct, or delete their personal data; ensuring a valid legal reason for processing data, such as explicit consent or a contractual necessity; implementing robust security measures to protect data and promptly reporting any data breaches; and providing heightened protection for sensitive categories of data, including health, biometric, genetic, children’s, financial, and criminal records.

The Personal Data Protection Law will be enforced by a national supervisory body, which will have powers to issue administrative warnings, suspend data processing, order data deletion, and impose significant administrative fines potentially calculated based on revenue. Serious violations can also lead to criminal penalties.

The harmful uses of deepfakes may arise where such conduct falls within the scope of offences under the Personal Data Protection Law. By way of example, under Article 67(3) of the Personal Data Protection Law, any person who ‘deliberately and unlawfully’ uses another individual’s personal data is subject to criminal sanctions. In this regard, deepfakes may arguably be categorised as personal data, insofar as they are capable of resembling or reproducing an individual’s biometric data. Accordingly, the deliberate and unlawful creation of deepfakes (such as the mimicking of a person’s voice and/or facial features) may constitute a violation of the law, as such conduct amounts to the misuse of personal data, particularly biometric data.

As at July 2026, existing standards or guidance on authentication or verification remain limited. Indonesian laws and regulations provide clear legal standards only for the authentication of electronic documents through electronic signatures and electronic certificates. There are no specific standards governing the verification of other forms of digital material, such as audio recordings, videos, or photographs.

Cybersecurity laws

In Indonesia there are two key cybersecurity laws, which together regulate the security of digital systems that may include AI-enabled functions.

Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions, 2008

The Electronic Information and Transactions Law 2008 is the principal statute governing electronic information, electronic documents, and electronic systems in Indonesia. More generally, it regulates the legal status of electronic information and transactions, unlawful acts involving digital systems, and certain obligations of actors operating in digital environments. The Law, especially as interpreted by the Constitutional Court, recognises electronic information and electronic documents as evidence. In Constitutional Court Decision No. 20/PUU-XIV/2016, the Court held that electronic evidence is constitutionally acceptable, but it must be obtained lawfully and through proper institutional authority. For AI-generated or AI-processed evidence, this means that the main procedural questions are likely to concern the legality of acquisition, integrity of the material, and evidential reliability, not simply whether AI was involved.

The Indonesian Electronic Information and Transactions Law establishes baseline standards that are relevant to AI systems used by law enforcement. Electronic system operators must ensure that their systems operate reliably and securely, protect data integrity and confidentiality, and comply with documented procedures. The regulation also provides safeguards for technology-related investigations by requiring authorities to consider privacy, data integrity, confidentiality, and the continuity of public services. As a result, AI-enabled law enforcement systems would be expected to meet established standards of security, reliability, and accountability.

Government Regulation No. 71 of 2019 on The Operation of Electronic Systems and Transactions, 2019

Government Regulation No. 71 of 2019 is one of the implementing regulations of Indonesia’s Electronic Information and Transactions Law 2008. It regulates, among others, the operation of electronic systems, electronic agents, electronic transactions, and electronic certification. As a result, AI-enabled systems in Indonesia used by public institutions or service providers may still need to comply with baseline requirements concerning system governance, security, reliability, and lawful operation.

Human rights

The Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, 1945

Several rights protected under Indonesia’s Constitution are directly relevant to the use of AI in criminal proceedings. Most notably, Article 28D(1) guarantees recognition, protection, certainty before a just law, and equal treatment before the law. Moreover, Article 28G(1) protects personal security, honour, dignity, and the right to feel secure, which is often read by Indonesian courts as the constitutional anchor for privacy. In criminal proceedings, the practical significance of these provisions lies in reinforcing arguments for fair trial guarantees, equality before the law, procedural transparency, and protection against disproportionate surveillance or data processing.

Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights, 1999

Indonesia’s Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights serves as the overarching framework for all legislation concerning human rights. The law regulates a range of fundamental civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, including:

1. The right to life under Article 9(1);
2. The right to personal liberty and security under Article 29;
3. The right to a hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal under Article 17;
4. The presumption of innocence, legality, legal aid, protection against double jeopardy under Article 18;
5. The right to equality before the law under Article 5(1);
6. Protection from discrimination under Article 3(3).

Though these human rights protections were formulated before AI technology was developed, they remain applicable as ethical foundations and safeguards for the fundamental rights of individuals against the misuse of technology. For example, the use of evidence generated or created by AI systems for court proceedings without verification or assessment by a human element may give rise to violations of core human rights protections, particularly those governing the right to a fair trial and due process of law.

Law No. 12 of 2025 on the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 2025

Indonesia is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (‘ICCPR’) and incorporated its provisions inLaw No. 12 of 2025 on the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Relevant rights include: the right to a fair trial, to judicial independence, and to express one’s views and have them considered in legal proceedings (Article 14 ICCPR); the right to non-discrimination (Articles 4 and 14 ICCPR); and the right to privacy and information self-determination and data protection (Article 17 ICCPR).

Outlook

As at July 2026, there are ongoing regulatory initiatives relevant to the use of AI in criminal proceedings in Indonesia.

In August 2025, the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs opened public consultation on a White Paper for a National AI Roadmap and a draft AI ethics framework, expressly stating that these would serve as the basis for two draft Presidential Regulations. These instruments are intended to provide a more coherent national framework for AI governance by setting the strategic direction, policy architecture, and ethical principles for AI development and deployment across sectors. Both regulations were originally expected to enter into force in early 2026. However, as at July 2026, these instruments remain in the drafting and coordination stage.

The Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs has also indicated that it is preparing a ministerial regulation that would require labelling or watermarking of AI-generated content as part of Indonesia’s digital-transparency agenda. As at July 2026, however, this proposal has not materialised.

CASES

As at July 2026, there are no reported cases on the use of AI tools in criminal proceedings in Indonesia. There has, however, been jurisprudence on deepfakes and digital evidence.

Deepfakes and synthetic images

In Decision No. 166/PUU‑XXI/2023 (January 2025), the Constitutional Court of Indonesia examined whether the use of digitally manipulated and AI‑assisted images in election campaigns violates the 1945 Constitution, especially the constitutional guarantees of free and fair elections (Article 22E(1)) and the right to accurate information (Article 28F). The case was brought by a voter who argued that the Election Law’s failure to regulate AI‑altered campaign imagery allows misleading representations of candidates, distorts voter choice, and undermines electoral honesty.

The Court emphasised that AI may be used in campaigns only within constitutional limits of transparency and truthfulness, reinforcing voters’ right to informed choice and the integrity of democratic elections. In its decision, the Court declared that the phrase ‘self-image’ in relation to photographs or images in Article 1(35) of the Election Law is inconsistent with the 1945 Constitution and has no binding legal force unless interpreted as ‘an original and recent photograph or image of the person concerned, which has not been excessively altered or manipulated using artificial intelligence (AI) technology’.

In a District Court decision (Decision No. 124/Pid.B/2025/Pn Gns) the Court examined AI‑generated deepfake content portraying the Indonesian President and other public officials for the purpose of obtaining personal financial gain. The Court found that such conduct constituted a violation of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (see above) and sentenced the perpetrator to imprisonment under the applicable provisions of that law.