Available via license: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 390
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia’s
Cyber Laws
Sardjana Orba Manullang
Department of Law, Faculty of Law, Universitas Krisnadwipayana, 13077,
Bekasi, West Java Province, Indonesia
Corresponding Author: somanullang@unkris.ac.id
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Publication Info:
Research Article
How to cite:
Manullang, S. O. (2022). The
Legality of Devious Cyber
Practices: Readiness of Indonesia’s
Cyber Laws. Society, 10(2), 390-
403.
DOI: 10.33019/society.v10i2.482
Copyright © 2022. Owned by
Author(s), published by Society
This is an open-access article.
License: Attribution-
NonCommercial-ShareAlike
(CC BY-NC-SA)
Received: September 22, 2022;
Accepted: December 16, 2020;
Published: December 30, 2022;
The ever-expanding Indonesian cyberspace has ushered in
significant economic growth to the country’s online business
and e-commerce. This is due to the country’s rising internet
penetration rate of 73% of its total population, with about 204
million people connected to the internet. This high connectivity
has brought about several positive socio-economic
opportunities but with other thorny issues like cybercrime,
misinformation, cyber-induced intolerance, disinformation,
trolling and cyber warfare. Despite the Indonesian
government’s intervention with measures to regulate cyber
activities, some devious cyber practices undefined in legal
literature continue to be practiced, even passed as legitimate,
sometimes leading to negative consequences. These practices
are often conducted as organized operations that target
populations to create mistrust and polarize the targeted
population. Some are crafted as cyber warfare declared by
entities within a country or from a foreign country targeting
another’s populace, which poses a threat to social order. This
paper explores these devious cyber practices and their strategies
and mitigation possibilities. A sociological research approach
coupled with the use of law enforcement theory was applied to
study and analyze Indonesia’s cyber security law enforcement
policies, the Internet and Electronic Transaction (ITE) Law,
the Criminal Prosecution Act, the Constitutional law, civil
society actors and private sector actors on cyber security.
Indonesian law and international law, coupled with available
technology, were reviewed for readiness to address threats
posed by these devious cyber issues to social order. Measures
taken by the Indonesian government are in readiness to combat
these cyberspace issues in its jurisdiction but also present more
questions on the proposals for reviews to the legislation and
Society, 10 (2), 390-403, 2022
P-ISSN: 2338-6932 | E-ISSN: 2597-4874
https://society.fisip.ubb.ac.id
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 391
introduction of content monitoring systems, which risk being
inappropriately deployed in censorships or suppression of
legitimate freedom of expression.
Keywords: Censorship; Cyber Policy; Cyber Warfare;
Indonesian Cyber Law; Indonesian Law
1. Introduction
Indonesia‘s cyberspace from October 2016 to April 2017 was filled with cyber activities and
material that substantially led to the country‘s largest-ever protest rally. A series of protests in
Jakarta started in mid-October 2016 following a video posted and shared online (Lim, 2017).
The resulting events included the biggest mass street protest in the history of Indonesia and the
arrest and eventual imprisonment of Jakarta‘s sitting governor (Mietzner & Muhtadi, 2018).
Activities that substantially led to these played out in cyberspace especially social media,
messaging apps and websites. The intentions of these cyber activities, whether devious or not,
could sway a supposedly independent justice system, change the political landscape, reinforce
existing social divisions and disrupt public order (Nuryanti, 2020; Paterson, 2019).
Indonesia‘s cyberspace is among the busiest in the world, with the biggest e-commerce in
southeast Asia; similarly, it has one of the most active social media. With this high connectivity,
Indonesia has had remarkable economic opportunities marked by increased economic growth,
with a substantial portion directly tied to online activity (Manullang, 2021a; Nugraha & Putri,
2016; Paterson, 2019). The same opportunities are presented in the socio-political landscape.
Many formally politically disengaged Indonesians, mostly from the middle class, have
increasingly engaged in social and political conversations as the internet presents better
platforms for free expression. The freedom of expression has also enabled an increased flow of
negative information created and disseminated purposely to amplify contentious, polarizing,
and even intimidating issues. For a country with much diversity and a history of divisive
politics along religious, tribal, ethnic, and racial lines, the internet is being actively used to
amplify and perpetuate these divisions (Lim, 2017; Toha et al., 2021). Some activities to this end
even claim legitimacy depending on how, where and when they are done and or if those
engaged in the practices have the backing or connections to the powerful and those in authority
(Gaidosch, 2018; Tyson, 2021).
Such devious cyber practices continue to elude the local and international law of many
countries (Lubin & Townley, 2020). The Indonesian authorities put policy and legal measures to
regulate cyberspace with more revisions to the proposed legislation. The Indonesian
government, civil society, academia, and private actors have been combating negative cyber
practices (Manuhutu et al., 2021; Manullang, 2020; Nugraha & Putri, 2016). Some of the
measures in place and proposed are under scrutiny for their possibility of authorizing
censorship, infringement on rights to free expression, privacy and against democratic values
(Paterson, 2019).
In this study, we examine the readiness of Indonesian cyber law to address practices of
concern in its cyberspace by exploring the Indonesian Cyber policy the Cyber Legislation. To
better understand the devious nature of some cyber practices in Indonesia‘s cyberspace, we will
analyze the country‘s socio-political issues that are historically shaped by divisive, exploitative
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 392
politics and how they are being impacted as they get magnified by the increased internet
connectivity. We will examine the threats posed by these issues to the country‘s budding
democracy and the government‘s policy shifts in response to these issues.
2. Increased Connectivity, Economic Growth, and Liberalism
A significant portion of Indonesia‘s expanding economy is attributed to online-based
activity and e-commerce, as evidenced by huge investments in the sector by e-commerce giants
such as Alibaba, JD.com, and Google (Jurriëns & Tapsell, 2017; Ramli, 2020). A projection of
Indonesia‘s economic growth curve points toward the country becoming among the top largest
world economies in purchasing power by 2050 (Nehru, 2016; Paterson, 2019).
This e-commerce growth is powered by increased connectivity, with over 204 million
people connected to the internet, especially via mobile connections (Chen, 2020; Manullang,
2020). Affordable data plans have led to Indonesians‘ exponential use of social media
(Manullang, 2020; Ramli, 2020). Ranked as the highest in phone use, averaging up to 180
minutes of screen time daily (Amin, 2014), Indonesians are also among the top-rated active
users of Twitter and Facebook (Paterson, 2019). In addition to e-commerce and social media,
government, civil society and academia have significantly adopted online service delivery even
in rural areas. The government‘s public feedback tool about its service delivery rating, called
LAPOR, was launched to encourage transparent and accountable public service delivery (Dini
et al., 2018; Manullang, 2021b).
Despite the increased connectivity, opportunities, social engagement and government
efforts, problematic issues of cyber security and cybercrime, unbalanced connections between
rural and urban areas still afflict Indonesia‘s cyberspace (Manuhutu et al., 2021; Manullang,
2021b; Setiawan & Suhartomo, 2019; Setti & Wanto, 2019). What is more low digital literacy and
know-how among certain sections of the population exclude them from taking advantage of the
opportunities presented by digital connectivity? Moreover, low digital connectivity literacy
renders many more susceptible to devious cyber practices, cybercrime victimization and
disinformation, which disrupt social order.
3. Devious Cyber Practices
Many devious cyber practices claim legitimacy (Manning & Agnew, 2020; Payne, 2018). In
this section, we examine social media manipulation through Trolling, called locally in Indonesia
called, ‗Buzzing‘, but the focus will be on double-sided trolling. In other studies, it is referred to
as rabble-rousing, which has eluded legal classification (Lubin & Townley, 2020). Social media
manipulation in Indonesia has its foundations in the history of the country itself and was
perpetrated by the state propaganda machinery of those eras as a means of controlling wider
social discourses, weaponizing diversity to sow paranoia and setting the scene for
authoritarianism (Berting, 2019; Shah & Taylor, 2021). The fall of authoritarianism in Indonesia
ushered in democratization, which came with the freedom of expression that was accelerated by
the coming of the internet and digital media. The social media scene exploded with activity
with the prevailing democracy that tolerated the previously suppressed freedom of expression.
However, the old habits of manipulating the narrative through popular media were now part of
the social psyche. Anyone could carry them out, not only those dominated by the state
machinery like in the past. This gave rise to social media troll factories‘ and ‗cyber armies‘ that
manipulate the narrative on social media on behalf of many parties, especially for political and
socio-economic ends (Sastramidjaja & Wijayanto, 2022).
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 393
The 2012 Jakarta gubernatorial elections kicked off the large-scale use of ‗cyber teams,‘
notably ‗buzzers‘/trolls in political campaigns. The trend was set, and many subsequent
political activities have recruited such cyber teams to push their agenda (Nuryanti, 2020;
Sastramidjaja & Wijayanto, 2022). The heightened cyber activity of this nature has become part
of daily life for Indonesians, often yielding real online and offline consequences (Lindsey &
Pausacker, 2016; Lim, 2017). Much as this kind is cyber activity could be constructive such as an
increase of political participation and free expression, much of it has resulted in amplified
divisions and disrupting order, and even influencing the justice system like in the case of the
imprisonment of Ahok the sitting governor of Jakarta (Lim, 2017; Berting, 2019).
The devious nature of trolling is often designed to intentionally sow negativity, which leads
to negative consequences, yet prosecutions for trolling are rare or nonexistent. This could be
partly due to the connection of the trollers to powerful entities in authority. A Muslim hacker
activist group used social media to amplify religious intolerance (Tapsell, 2021). It stole targeted
people‘s (perceived as insulting Islam) personal information and published it online (Paterson,
2019; Berting, 2019). There have been indications of links between powerful political parties and
the Indonesian military (Paterson, 2019; Boyle, 2020).
4. Trolling/Buzzing
Online social network users lately have to grapple with trolling. Much as trolling has
negative and positive classifications, this study focuses on the negative troller that practitioners
particularly identify as a Hater (Hodge & Hallgrimsdottir, 2020; Horse et al., 2021). In this light,
the term has been used to mean intentionally posting provocative, offensive or menacing
messages through a communications network. This definition clearly illustrates the devious
nature of trolling, yet it is an activity by many, including those in authority. Trolling continues
to elude the law, even in some instances claiming legality and passing on as ‗free speech‘ or ‗art‘
as in the case of Elonis Vs. the United States (Reichel, 2019; Roark, 2015).
A common example of trolling in Indonesia is the ‗cyber troops‘ locally referred to as
‗buzzers‘ (Sastramidjaja and Wijayanto, 2022). The available literature on the subject holds that
a buzzer amplifies certain points of view opinions on given issues or brands to reach a broader
audience (Lim, 2017; Sastramidjaja & Wijayanto, 2022). The buzzing phenomenon in Indonesia
became popular in 2009, with main influencers paid to promote products and brands, and it
exploded during the 2012 gubernatorial elections in Jakarta (Neyasyah, 2020; Syahputra, 2019).
Political candidates on all sides recruited and paid teams of buzzers to push their side of the
political agenda. Of course, how the buzzers did was up to the creativity of the buzzer. The
creativity in trolling often involves putting out material that will attract the most attention.
Indonesian politics meant amplifying divisive opinions along religious, cultural, ethnic, racial
and economic lines. After the blasphemy accusations against Ahok, the Jakarta governor, in
2016 and the subsequent demonstrations that led to his arrest and imprisonment, cyber activity
was flooded with divisive material put out on the internet and amplified by trolls. Anti-Ahok
material circulated was, for instance, critical of his Chinese ethnicity, which denotes being a
foreigner and communist; his Christian faith was touted through radical Islamist tones as an
infidel (Lim, 2017; Ong & Tapsell, 2021). The other side also pushed distorted facts about
Ahok‘s opponent; Anies accused him of being linked to several corruption incidences and made
absurd accusations that he had intentions of introducing sharia law and being cheered on by
Iranian Shia groups. Such material drowned out alternative opinions and created a highly
charged polarized atmosphere that spilled out of cyberspace into communities and homes,
turning people against each other.
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 394
5. Double-sided Trolling (Rabble-rousing)
Having eluded the spotlight of extensive scholarly analysis is a very cruel and treacherous
devious way of planting disharmony among the populace is the habit of ―playing on both
sides‖ on the internet (Fichman & McClelland, 2021). Practitioners who have studied this
practice refer to it as ‗rabble-rousing‘ (Lubin & Townley, 2020). For this study, we shall refer to
it as ‗double-sided trolling,‘ which involves organizing and coordinating operations to amplify
a divisive issue by supporting both sides. To better grasp the practice, we will draw from
examples from both the local and international scenes.
Locally, double-sided trolling manifested more in divisive, politically oriented issues. Back
to the Ahok-Anies Jakarta gubernatorial campaign and the blasphemy incident, double-sided
trolling was practiced by groups that operated different websites, which amplified divisive
material in opposition to each other as operating similarly on social media. For example,
arrahmah.com posted anti-Ahok material while its spoof arrahmahnews.com posted pro-Ahok
material. The same was with VOA-islamnews.com, a knock-off of VOA-islam.com, and
pkspuyengan.com, a spoof of the currently defunct pkspiyungan.com (Lim, 2017). Setting aside
the ideological intentions of these double-sided trolling practices, their actions aim to plant
disharmony in Indonesia‘s young democracy (Lubin & Townley, 2020). The trollers play both
sides in such instances, making the Indonesian populace victims.
Internationally, the most notable instances of double-sided trolling played out in the United
States cyberspace. Trolls played both sides by amplifying divisive issues, such as in the 2016
presidential elections between Trump and Hillary Clinton and the U.S. Vaccination mandate
debate in 2020, which were blamed on Russian double-sided trolling to sow disharmony and
undermine U.S. democracy (Broniatowski et al., 2018). In Germany, Russian double-sided trolls
were said to have played both on the side of ‗the far-right‘ and actively on the side of ‗the left-
wing anti-fascists, reaffirming the stance of analysts who assert that Russia intends to plant
disharmony in western democratic countries. Similarly, analysts have pointed out that China
has thousands of paid operatives, a.k.a. ‗the 50-cent army,‘ whose task is to manipulate
common belief through devious cyber practices such as social media interactions (Lubin &
Townley, 2020).
6. Threats Paused by Double-Sided Trolling
The gist of the matter in double-sided trolling is its ability to simultaneously amplify
contradicting issues. The double-sided nature of this kind of trolling, coupled with its mass
production and dissemination, which sometimes involves bots while hiding their real intentions
inflict real assaults on social harmony, disguising it as legitimate expression. The devious
intentions of these practices do not offer any good to society.
The practice can destabilize wider communities, and therefore worth paying attention to its
destructiveness. It stealthily intrudes on public discourse and contaminates genuine views and
opinions, thereby adulterating the fundamental domains that enable the proper functioning of a
democratic process (McGonagle et al., 2019). Double-sided trolling exploits polarizing elements
in a community, driving people into embracing more divisive and extreme stances (Clark &
Aufderheide, 2011). Studies have shown that social media algorithms are configured to
accelerate social polarization (Paterson, 2019).
The double-sided trolling practice of amplifying divisiveness seriously threatens a young
democracy with varied diversities like Indonesia, as it undermines the vulnerable issues of
promoting an open society with freedom of information flow, free expression and discussion of
conflicting issues and identities (Fichman & McClelland, 2021).
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 395
From the international legal setup perspective, the essence of international law is in
connecting countries in a coalescence around common values, collaboration and peace.
Therefore, practices grounded in absurd intentions of driving groups, communities and
individuals further apart contradict the idea of ‗peace with one another‘ as expressed in the
United Nations Charter (Lubin & Townley, 2020).
7. The Legality of Some Devious Cyber Practices
Most devious cyber practices may be placed in obvious cybercrime categorizations like
disinformation, fake news, hacking and the like. However, trolling continues to evade all forms
of legal categorization despite its destructive consequences. Being practices carried out in
cyberspace, the challenges of finding the perpetrators or proving the illegitimacy of the
practices are enormous.
The exploration of elements of Indonesian law and international law on this problematic
issue of double-sided trolling is limited to a few principles, most of which are international law
domains. These domains include prohibited coercive intervention, sovereignty, and self-
determination. National and international law domains include human rights, freedom of
expression and subversive activities. The illegality of these devious cyber practices can be
conceptualized through these domains of law. Measures put in place and suggested for cyber
policy and cyber law review in Indonesia are problematic in certain instances, ironically
manifest as draconian measures that risk victimizing the very populace it is protecting (Ong &
Tapsell, 2021).
8. The International Paradigm
8.1. The Principle of Non-intervention
Ordinarily, the principle of non-intervention intuitively connotes the implication that the
devious cyber practices ―intervene‖ in other people‘s matters. Through the lens of prohibitions
attached to intervention in others‘ affairs, double-sided trolling is an act of interference.
Practitioners point out that coercion must be proven to designate non-intervention as illegal
(Lubin & Townley, 2020). Coercion as an element in law is a determinant in the legal principle
of non-intervention. But again, trolling exploits existing discourse and technological systems to
interfere in and or calculatedly pollute online discourse. As devious as this practice may be, it
usually does not manifest as coercive or take over the functioning of anything.
8.2. Subversion
People have the right to self-determine. Local and international law recognizes people‘s
right to decide on matters that affect their destiny and have the freedom to engage in political,
economic, cultural and social activities without interference (Castellino, 2021). Subversive
activities interfere with these freedoms; subversive propaganda is described as information
intended to undermine the functioning of institutions by influencing a population toward an
uprising or insurrection (Breitenbauch & Byrjalsen, 2019). The destabilizing nature of double-
sided trolling could fit within subversive activities. Moreover, spreading subversive
propaganda is a legal prohibition in local and international law. However, this may not be the
case if the trolling only amplifies already existing issues, but again this amplification helps keep
the activity alive and fulfilling its intended purpose.
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 396
8.3. Human Rights
The broad nature of defining the right to free expression presents a challenge in designating
trolling as legal or illegal. The broad definition international bodies on human rights law have
put on freedom of expression includes the right to seek, receive and impart information and
ideas of all kinds regardless of frontiers (Farsi et al., 2018). All kinds of frontiers are further
expounded to refer to all kinds of ideas and opinions that can be transmitted to others through
all kinds of media and methods of expression (Howie, 2018; Lubin & Townley, 2020). Many
devious cyber practices capable of masquerading as genuine free expression manage to gain
legal protection and even claim legitimacy as free expression. Double-sided trolling and other
devious cyber practices receive less policy regulation because of the strong legal protection
afforded to freedom of expression. In this light, cyber practitioners, academia and civil society
in Indonesia share the view that the government measures to combat issues in its cyberspace
have problematic legislative reviews, and automated content moderation could be a tool for
censorship and suppression of free expression (Paterson, 2019; Ong & Tapsell, 2021).
9. Readiness of the Indonesian Cyber Policy and Laws
The huge benefits to the Indonesian populace of the internet are undeniable, and so are the
disadvantages and threats. The national and international laws in their current form do not
provide satisfactory legal solutions to the problem of devious cyber practices such as double-
sided trolling. The phenomenon eludes capture even under the principles of non-intervention
and self-determination. The same is true of subversive propaganda prohibitions, which may not
offer substantive workable measures against a problem like trolling. The insufficiency of legal
solutions calls for consideration of non-legal measures to address such cyber practices. The
Indonesian government, civil society, academia and private sector are players in efforts to
address negative cyber activity in Indonesian cyberspace.
9.1. Legal Landscape on Cyber issues in Indonesia’s Cyberspace
The main legislation on cyber issues in Indonesia is the Electronic Information and
Transactions (ITE) Law (2008) (Nugraha & Putri, 2016). This law was reviewed in 2006 to cater
to cybercrime and also empowered officials with the power to block what is deemed as
prohibited material. Articles 27 to 36 of the ITE Law stipulate the provisions for prohibited
cyber-related acts (Siregar & Lubis, 2021).
9.1.1. Legal Elements of Cyber Issues
Evidence: Article 42 of the ITE Law also provides for conducting investigations in line
with Article 183 of the Criminal Prosecution Procedure (Fernando et al., 2022). As such, the
system of determining evidence adopted follows the theory of evidence where rulings follow
the syllogistic form of reasoning, which experts have critiqued as not contributing to the
knowledge of the truth (Sommer, 1997). Given that evidence should be based on provisions of
the law, it is required to be recorded and submitted as evidence in a court of law following the
provisions of Article 184 of the Criminal Prosecution Procedure, which requires the following:
Witness Testimony: This is expected to be delivered following the provisions of the
Criminal Prosecution procedure and executed under oath and in fulfillment of the following
requirements (Arimuladi, 2022).
Free of fabrications, opinions and expert views.
Align with the principle of ‗unus testis nullus testis‘ the existence of more than a single
witness.
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 397
Witness testimony is not reliant on hearsay.
Consistency of information among the witnesses.
The nature of cyber practices, which occur entirely in cyberspace, makes it difficult or
impossible to attain usable witness testimony in a legal matter. The witness testimony here
could only be hearsay, which can only be taken under the condition of ‗testimonium di auditu‘.
Much as it is not directly considered as evidence, it may be instrumental in attempts to
strengthen the stance of the case (Amin & Huda, 2021; Pujoyono, 2020).
Experts’ opinion: Involving an expert in the field under review, capable of clearly
elaborating issues about the case/matter. Must be able to give compelling statements that
reflect an impartial opinion on particular aspects of matters within his expertise that are in
dispute (Harahap et al., 2019).
Documentation as evidence: Many kinds of documents are recognized as evidence if
authenticated. Provisions for documentation as evidence are stipulated in Article 184, clause C
and article 187 of the Criminal Prosecution Procedure (Asmara et al., 2019).
Defendants’ statements: This is provided for in Articles 189 and 184 of the Criminal
Prosecution Procedure, where the defendants make statements and narrations about their
actions and what they experienced (Balo et al., 2020).
9.2. Law Enforcement on Cyber Issues
Following the emergence of cyber issues, policy strategies aimed at preventing, eliminating
and mitigating cyber-related issues were implemented in individual countries and on the
international scene. Cyber law is one of the elements crucial to implementing cyber policy
strategies, which cannot work on its own but in tandem with other strategic policy elements to
address cybercrime (Amin & Huda, 2021). This was in line with deliberations of the United
Nations Congress, which explored possibilities of using policies geared towards regulating
cyber activities and practices to address cyber crime in conjunction with individual countries‘
criminal law (Rajput, 2018).
9.2.1. Punitive Approach
The penal approach to cybercrime and other cyber practices in Indonesia is being
implemented. There have been several prosecutions related to the cyber activity. Most of the
cases were related to straightforward criminal activity, such as fraud and theft through hacking;
others were prosecuted as defamation cases. However, criminal law is often not taken as an
ideal policy instrument for addressing devious cyber practices but rather as a tool of strategic
importance in such an effort. Practitioners have put forth the idea of discussing cyber issues
with the harmonization of existing cyber laws with a focus on criminalizing certain activities in
cyberspace, paying attention to procedural approaches and considerations in constitutional law
(Schallbruch & Skierka, 2018; Amin & Huda, 2021).
9.2.2. Non-punitive Approach
The idea of preventing devious cyber practices without a punitive approach in Indonesia
has to involve more of taking preventive measures. Such measures could address a combination
of factors that may lead to indulgence in devious cyber practices by talking about socio-legal
phenomena that may lead to such practices (Paterson, 2019; Tapsell, 2021). Societal digital
literacy efforts come in handy at this point. In harmonizing cyber laws and constitutional law,
efforts can be undertaken to minimize negative cyber practices by identifying aggravating
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 398
factors to such practices (Lim, 2017). However, the effectiveness of non-punitive efforts in
dealing with the prevalence of negative cyber practices remains uncertain, but what is certain is
that issues committed in cyberspace require global vigilance as they transcend territorial
borders and could have consequences in any country (Lubin & Townley, 2020).
10. Technology and Government in Curbing Devious Cyber Practices
At least in its current versions, Indonesian and international law do not adequately address
the issue of devious online practices. In the international realm, principles of non-intervention
in other country‘s affairs or a nation‘s right to self-determination and safeguarding territorial
sovereignty do not deter negative online practices. Prohibitions on transboundary harm, for
instance, are more symbolic than practical in their ability to lessen the risks associated with
cross-territorial online devious practices. Without proper legal remedies, countries could
consider resorting to extra-legal methods to safeguard their society and aggressively combat the
destabilizing effects of online actions like buzzing/ double-sided trolling. The many
technological methods that may be employed to counter devious online practices are examined
in this section.
Understanding the specific technological changes to our information is vital before
considering what solutions may be beneficial. Without the aid of the information technology
landscape, a phenomenon like trolling/buzzing could not have emerged. The dominance of the
internet and social media in today‘s significantly transformed information and communication
landscape directly contributes to devious online practices (Lubin & Townley, 2020). Decades
ago, possessing a printing press was the sole realistic method of mass communication, and
public discussion was done very differently. Common online negative practices are a
phenomenon that could not happen in those conditions.
The public actions and debates of Internet users throughout the world are currently
accessible, making it simple for actors to examine the cultural and socio-economic distinctions
that are ripe for negative actions like double-sided trolling. Anybody may now instantaneously
access a national audience since communication obstacles linked to offline paper-based
communication and mass media have been greatly reduced. Determined and well-funded
players can flood public discussion forums with data to sway discussions in their favor.
Additionally, we have direct access to people owing to targeting techniques created for
advertising. As a result, some actors are well-equipped to influence different demographic
segments of a targeted community, often with devastating results to the community.
Devious cyber operatives are protected by anonymity. Many popular platforms have given
up on using one‘s real name as a means of official identification. Users are not required to
disclose any information about their physical identity while using various online platforms for
communication, including posting reactions on news websites with feedback commentary
capabilities. Clouded online identities make it harder for law enforcement to make a formal
identification and allow devious online practices to deceive normal internet users into thinking
there has been an unplanned rise in public opinion.
Sensitive, contentious, misleading and predatory material has been shown to spread.
However, news feeds and curating algorithms are used (Tenove et al., 2018), which are
necessary for organizing enormous amounts of internet content online that users can access
more quickly. According to experts, content recommendations may steer users to more
controversial or radical content than they were seeking. Others have shown that, despite most
social media users being moderate, tiny, but extremely active, communities post and share links
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 399
to manipulative and exploitative websites and are responsible for the most viewed online
content.
Most popular platforms are designed to boost participation and generate revenue, leaving
them vulnerable to trolls rather than providing structured, productive forums. This enables bad
actors to frame sensitive issues in controversial ways that might become viral, giving them
power over matters often debated in public.
Realistic solutions to these vulnerabilities are exceedingly difficult to put into practice.
Divergent opinions exist on the subject matter of digital literacy. According to research, those
with less digital literacy are more prone to manipulation since they are less able to evaluate the
validity or origins of digital communications. Practitioners assert that blaming individuals
rather than governments, tech companies, and Internet service providers would be
inappropriate. Others argue that the only way to lessen the incidence and effects of online
negativity like harassment campaigns is through technology providers; given their proximity to
the problem and the rapid pace of technological advancement, they can develop ways to detect
devious users and warn vulnerable users.
In the absence of, or in addition to, any effective long-term solutions, states may be obliged
to respond by establishing proactive organizations dedicated to combating misleading
information campaigns. These institutions might, if badly implemented, only serve to escalate
public anger toward a system that is already inadequate at combating disinformation. The
Indonesian government‘s internet monitoring initiatives, which were set up to decrease sneaky
online behavior, have drawn criticism for their propensity to infringe on freedoms of expression
while failing to stop hate speech from particular groups in society. These policies are seen as
effective tools that support nations in their vigorous battle against misinformation and push
their implementers toward dictatorship.
Some nations rely on digital literacy efforts and public awareness campaigns to raise
awareness of harmful internet impacts. Experts agree that developing and sustaining
constructive conversation is the best response rather than vigorously disputing the facts.
Additionally, many nations have established institutions to preventively address negative
online activities.
11. Conclusion
Given the distinctive elusiveness and contradictory character of devious online practices,
the feasible options to address it is with the use of technology and the law, considering the
importance of international multi-faceted collaborative initiatives on the same. It is challenging
to identify a workable international legal framework that would permit the corrosive
characteristics of devious online practices, such as double-sided trolling, to be categorically
considered illegal, as is the case with amplification activities more broadly. Even if it may be
challenging to do so legally, there are reasons to feel that devious online practices such as
double-sided trolling and buzzing should not continue existing without being tackled by both
local and international legal frameworks. The contradictory nature of double-sided trolling in
the context of the human right to free speech leads one to believe that it does not have many
expressive benefits deserving of protection. Double-sided trolling is made feasible by many
significant changes in our informational environment brought about by technological
advancement. Given the absence of legal remedies, states seeking to thwart the practice and
lessen its negative impacts may need to consider technological alternatives. This paper creates
the opportunity for more effort on several fronts. It sheds light on the importance of legal
reviews and international collaboration on conceptual issues that address the distinctively
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 400
destructive characteristics of online devious practices and operations of the same kind in the
digital age, such as double-sided trolling and buzzing. The importance of conducting
concentrated research into the effectiveness of various technology tactics to fend off devious
online practices and other divisive online information operations has to be highlighted.
Theorists and technologists should collaborate to advance these two goals since they should be
pursued simultaneously.
12. Acknowledgment
The author is grateful to express gratitude to all of those who have had the pleasure to work
during this research conducted.
13. Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author has declared no potential conflicts of interest concerning this article‘s research,
authorship, and/or publication.
References
Amin, K. (2014). Indonesians Spend most Time on Smartphones in the World. The Jakarta Post,
June 5. Retrieved from
https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/06/05/indonesians-spend-most-time-
smartphones-world.html
Amin, M. E., & Huda, M. K. (2021). Harmonization of Cyber Crime laws with the Constitutional
Law in Indonesia. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 15(1), 79-94.
Arimuladi, S. U. (2022). Access to Justice Based on Expert Testimony in Tax Crimes: An
Integrated Criminal Justice System Perspective in Indonesia. Pandecta Research Law
Journal, 17(1), 29-36. Retrieved from
https://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/pandecta/article/view/32622
Asmara, T. T. P., Ikhwansyah, I., & Afriana, A. (2019). Ease of Doing Business: Gagasan
Pembaruan Hukum Penyelesaian Sengketa Investasi di Indonesia. University of Bengkulu
Law Journal, 4(2), 118–136. https://doi.org/10.33369/ubelaj.4.2.125-143
Balo, H. H. R., Wantu, F. M., & Tijow, L. M. (2020). System for Evidence of Corruption Criminal
Act in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 8(2), 46-55. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2020/v8i230222
Berting, N. (2019). On the shrinking spaces of social media, in Indonesia and elsewhere (Graduation
Thesis). Willem de Kooning Academy (WDKA), The Netherlands. Retrieved from
https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mw-mediadesign/images/c/cf/Tash_1902.2_Thesis.pdf
Boyle, P. (2020). Indonesia’s cyber war on West Papua solidarity. Green Left Weekly, (1251), 13.
https://search.informit.org/doi/abs/10.3316/informit.934561010777204
Breitenbauch, H., & Byrjalsen, N. (2019). Subversion, statecraft and liberal democracy. Survival,
61(4), 31-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2019.1637118
Broniatowski, D. A., Jamison, A. M., Qi, S., AlKulaib, L., Chen, T., Benton, A., ... & Dredze, M.
(2018). Weaponized health communication: Twitter bots and Russian trolls amplify the
vaccine debate. American journal of public health, 108(10), 1378-1384.
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304567
Castellino, J. (2021). International law and self-determination: the interplay of the politics of territorial
possession with formulations of post-colonial ‘national’ identity. BRILL.
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 401
Chen, L. (2020). Improving digital connectivity for e-commerce: A policy framework and empirical note
for ASEAN. Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia. https://www.think-
asia.org/handle/11540/11681
Clark, J., & Aufderheide, P. (2011). A New Vision for Public Media. In Media and Social Justice (pp.
55-67). Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230119796_5
Dini, A. A., Sæbo, Ø., & Wahid, F. (2018). Affordances and effects of introducing social media
within eParticipation—Findings from government‐initiated Indonesian project. The
Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 84(4), e12035.
https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12035
Farsi, M., Daneshkhah, A., Far, A. H., Chatrabgoun, O., & Montasari, R. (2018). Crime data
mining, threat analysis and prediction. In Cyber Criminology (pp. 183-202). Springer,
Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97181-0_9
Fernando, J. Z., Pujiyono, P., Rozah, U., & Rochaeti, N. (2022). The freedom of expression in
Indonesia. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 2103944.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2103944
Fichman, P., & McClelland, M. W. (2021). The impact of gender and political affiliation on
trolling. First Monday, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v26i1.11061
Gaidosch, T. (2018). The Industrialization of Cybercrime: Lone-wolf hackers yield to mature
businesses. Finance & Development, 55(2), 22-26.
Harahap, R. R. M., Munawir, Z., & Hidayani, S. (2019). Tinjauan Yuridis Penyelesaian Sengketa
Atas Pemakai Kartu Kredit Tipe Gold Dengan Bank Penerbit Kartu Kredit (Studi Putusan
No. 161/Pdt-G/2017/PN. Mdn). JUNCTO: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 1(2), 136-142.
https://doi.org/10.31289/juncto.v1i2.210
Hodge, E., & Hallgrimsdottir, H. (2020). Networks of hate: the alt-right,―troll culture‖, and the
cultural geography of social movement spaces online. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 35(4),
563-580. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2019.1571935
Horse, A. J. Y., Jeung, R., Lim, R., Tang, B., Im, M., Higashiyama, L., ... & Chen, M. (2021). Stop
AAPI hate national report. Stop AAPI Hate: San Francisco, CA, USA.
https://stopaapihate.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/21-SAH-NationalReport2-
v2.pdf
Howie, E. (2018). Protecting the human right to freedom of expression in international law.
International Journal of Speech-language Pathology, 20(1), 12-15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2018.1392612
Jurriëns, E., & Tapsell, R. (Eds.). (2017). Digital Indonesia: connectivity and divergence. ISEAS-Yusof
Ishak Institute. https://doi.org/10.1355/9789814786003
Lim, M. (2017). Freedom to hate: social media, algorithmic enclaves, and the rise of tribal
nationalism in Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 49(3), 411-427.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2017.1341188
Lindsey, T., & Pausacker, H. (Eds.). (2016). Religion, law, and intolerance in Indonesia. Routledge,
Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315657356
Lubin, A., & Townley, H. (2020). The International Law of Rabble Rousing. 45 Yale Journal of
International Law Online 1 (March 2020).
https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/2907/
Manning, M., & Agnew, S. (2020). Policing in the era of AI and smart societies: austerity;
legitimacy and blurring the line of consent. In Policing in the Era of AI and Smart Societies
(pp. 59-82). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50613-1_2
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 402
Manuhutu, M. A., Muttaqin, M., Irmayani, D., Tamara, T., Gustiana, Z., Hazriani, H., ... &
Karim, A. (2021). Pengantar Forensik Teknologi Informasi. Medan: Yayasan Kita Menulis.
Manullang, S. O. (2020). The Declaration Content in Law of Electronic Transaction Information
on Online Prostitution: In the Review of the Legal Sociology View. International Journal of
Social Sciences, 3(1), 62– 70. https://doi.org/10.31295/ijss.v3n1.151
Manullang, S. O. (2021a). Perubahan Sosial Masyarakat Pedesaan Di Era Teknologi.
Cross-border, 4(1), 83-88.
Manullang, S. O. (2021b). Kesadaran Masyarakat Dalam Memahami Undang Undang Nomor 11
Tahun 2008 Tentang Informasi Transaksi Elektronik Dalam Media Sosial. International
Journal of Community Service and Development (INCOMMENT), 1(1), 10–20. Retrieved from
http://incomment.org/index.php/INCOMMENT/article/view/2
McGonagle, T., Bednarski, M., Francese Coutinho, M., & Zimin, A. (2019). Elections and media in
digital times. UNESCO Publishing. https://hdl.handle.net/11245.1/fa304e04-40bb-4519-
b0db-f272de79b83f
Mietzner, M., & Muhtadi, B. (2018). Explaining the 2016 Islamist mobilisation in Indonesia:
Religious intolerance, militant groups and the politics of accommodation. Asian Studies
Review, 42(3), 479-497. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2018.1473335
Nehru, V. (2016). Indonesia: The Reluctant Giant. The National Interest, February 11.
https://carnegieendowment.org/2016/02/11/indonesia-reluctant-giant-pub-62745
Neyasyah, M. S. (2020, March). Legal Resilience in the Phenomenon of Social Media Political
Buzzer in Indonesia. In 3rd International Conference on Law and Governance (ICLAVE
2019) (pp. 338-344). Atlantis Press. https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.200321.044
Nugraha, L. K., & Putri, D. A. (2016). Mapping the Cyber Policy Landscape: Indonesia. London:
Global Partners Digital.
Nuryanti, S. (2020). Populism in Indonesia: Learning from the 212 Movement in Response to the
Blasphemy Case against Ahok in Jakarta. In Populism in Asian Democracies (pp. 165-175).
Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004444461_011
Ong, J. C., & Tapsell, R. (2021). Demystifying disinformation shadow economies: fake news
work models in Indonesia and the Philippines. Asian Journal of Communication, 1-17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2021.1971270
Paterson, T. (2019). Indonesian cyberspace expansion: a double-edged sword. Journal of Cyber
Policy, 4(2), 216-234. https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2019.1627476
Payne, B. (2018). White-Collar Cybercrime: White-Collar Crime, Cybercrime, or Both?.
Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society, 19(3), 16-32.
https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/white-collar-cybercrime-crime-
both/docview/2164138515/se-2
Pujoyono, N. W. (2020). Penal Policy dalam Upaya Preventif Kejahatan Carding di Indonesia.
Jurnal Panji Keadilan: Jurnal Ilmiah Nasional Mahasiswa Hukum, 3(1), 86-98.
https://doi.org/10.36085/jpk.v3i1.1183
Rajput, B. (2018). Identifying the challenges of criminal justice system while responding to cyber
economic crime. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 6(1), 146-155.
Ramli, K. (2020). Indonesia on the Move: Improving Connectivity to Support E-commerce. E-
commerce Connectivity in ASEAN, 31.
Reichel, P. L. (Ed.). (2019). Global Crime: An Encyclopedia of Cyber Theft, Weapons Sales, and Other
Illegal Activities [2 volumes]. ABC-CLIO.
The Legality of Devious Cyber Practices: Readiness of Indonesia's Cyber Laws
Copyright © 2022. Owned by Author(s), published by Society. This is an open-access article under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.482 403
Roark, M. M. (2015) Elonis v. United States: The Doctrine of True Threats: Protecting Our Ever-
Shrinking First Amendment Rights in the New Era of Communication. Pittsburgh Journal
of Technology Law & Policy, 15. https://doi.org/10.5195/tlp.2015.162
Sastramidjaja Y. & Wijayanto (2022). Cyber Troops, Online Manipulation of Public Opinion and
Co-Optation of Indonesia‘s Cybersphere. ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute. Issue 7.
https://doi.org/10.1355/9789815011500
Schallbruch, M., & Skierka, I. (2018). Current Priorities and Gaps in German National
Cybersecurity, Future Trends. In Cybersecurity in Germany (pp. 49-64). Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90014-8_5
Setiawan, T., & Suhartomo, A. (2019, August). The relation between internet use and societal
development in Indonesia. In 2019 International Conference on Sustainable Engineering and
Creative Computing (ICSECC) (pp. 133-137). IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSECC.2019.8907127
Setti, S., & Wanto, A. (2019). Analysis of Backpropagation Algorithm in Predicting the Most
Number of Internet Users in the World. Jurnal Online Informatika, 3(2), 110-115.
Shah, T. S., & Taylor, C. H. (2021). The ―Ashoka Approach‖ and Indonesian Leadership in the
Movement for Pluralist Re-Awakening in South and Southeast Asia. The Review of Faith &
International Affairs, 19(2), 56-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2021.1917149
Siregar, G., & Lubis, M. R. (2021). Juridical Analysis of Religious Blasphemy Crimes Through
Smartphone Application Based On The Information and Electronic Transaction. Journal of
Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 27(2), 1006-1012.
http://dx.doi.org/10.47750/cibg.2021.27.02.120
Sommer, P. (1997). Downloads, Logs and Captures: Evidence from Cyberspace. Journal of
Financial Crime, 5(2), 138-151. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb025826
Syahputra, I. (2019). Expressions of hatred and the formation of spiral of anxiety on social
media in Indonesia. SEARCH Journal of Media and Communication Research, 11(1), 95-112.
http://search.taylors.edu.my/
Tapsell, R. (2021). Social media and elections in Southeast Asia: The emergence of subversive,
underground campaigning. Asian Studies Review, 45(1), 117-134.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2020.1841093
Tenove, C., Buffie, J., McKay, S., & Moscrop, D. (2018). Digital threats to democratic elections: how
foreign actors use digital techniques to undermine democracy.
Toha, R. J., Gueorguiev, D. D., & Sinpeng, A. (2021). The normalization of intolerance: The 2019
presidential election in Indonesia. Electoral Studies, 74, 102391.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2021.102391
Tyson, A. (2021). Blasphemy and judicial legitimacy in Indonesia. Politics and Religion, 14(1),
182-205. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755048319000427
__________________________
About the Author
Sardjana Orba Manullang obtained his Doctoral degree in Legal Studies from Universitas
Parahyangan, Indonesia, in 2011. The author is a lecturer at the Department of Law, Faculty of
Law, Universitas Krisnadwipayana, Indonesia.
E-Mail: somanullang@unkris.ac.id
