Crime in cyberspace has become increasingly widespread these days. The Bjorka case that occurred throughout 2022 illustrates how vulnerable cyberspace is to attacks and crimes. Cybercrime can be committed from anywhere. It is also known as a transnational crime within the country and abroad. This later became the background for Airlangga Institute for International Law Studies (AIILS) to hold an open discussion again on Friday, 11 November 2022. The title raised at the activity was “Questioning the Jurisdiction of the PDP Law vs. the ITE Law: Problems and Challenges in the Digital Age”.

Present as resource persons from student elements at the activity were Nenes Renata, a student at the Faculty of Law, Airlangga University, and Fachry Dwi Handoko, an Information Systems student at the Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology. Also present was Masitoh Indriani, S.H., LL.M. , a cyber law expert at the Faculty of Law, Airlangga University, to respond to the discussion. The discussion was opened directly by Adhy Riadhy Arafah, S.H., LL.M. (Adv.), as the Director of Airlangga Institute for International Law Studies (AIILS). He hopes that this meeting in the future can result in closer collaboration between the Faculty of Law, Universitas Airlangga, and the Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology, especially from the student side.

Then, Nenes Renata had the first opportunity to present her argument from a legal perspective. According to her, it is at least necessary to understand the jurisdiction first in dealing with transnational crimes. Based on the legal provisions in the ITE Law and the PDP Law, all legal actions that harm Indonesia’s interests fall under the jurisdiction of the Indonesian state under the objective territorial principle. Nonetheless, the two have essential differences. The jurisdiction in the ITE Law only requires that legal consequences only occur in Indonesia. Whereas in the PDP Law, this jurisdiction was again expanded to protect data subjects of Indonesian citizens abroad. However, whether cyber crimes that occur abroad can indeed be tried in Indonesia is still a question. In answering this question, it is at least necessary to know Indonesia’s readiness to carry out Mutual Legal Assistance and extradition.

Fachry Dwi Handoko then continued by examining the Indonesian government’s infrastructure’s readiness to respond to cyber crimes. According to him, cyber crimes do not recognize the boundaries of state jurisdiction and are sometimes carried out anonymously. Hackers often easily understand the weaknesses and loopholes in the cyber infrastructure in Indonesia. This is proven by the Bjorka case, the Tokopedia case, and even the final voter list for the 2014 general election. The various ways that are usually carried out in cybercrime in the form of hacking are using SQL Injection techniques and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks.

Regarding the discussion, Masitoh Indriani, S.H., LL.M., then provide feedback. According to her, at least the direction of the conversation tends to lead to cyber security aspects, with a tiny element in it being cybercrime. The discussion has also illustrated law in Indonesia already exists as a means or tool to ensnare criminal acts on the internet. However, the main problem is whether cyberspace can be measured and its boundaries between countries known because of its invisible nature but its influence can be felt. This shows that law is an essential aspect in the cyber context, but it is also an important technical aspect of translating existing technology. “Whatever the type of cybercrime, what is certain is that it is true, disturbing, and detrimental to all of us,” she explained. In the context of cyber security, at least three elements must be protected, namely infrastructure, information security, and individual security. “Then the next job for all of us is what should Indonesia do next?” she said in closing.