The Attorney General's Office Like a 'Digital Spies! Handles Cases, Can Tap Into Telkomsel, XL, Indosat, Even Smartfren Numbers'
PR KUNINGAN — The Supreme Prosecutors Office of the Republic of Indonesia (Kejagung RI) has made a significant breakthrough in law enforcement in the digital age.
On Thursday, June 26, 2025, the Indonesian Attorney General's Office officially signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with four national telecommunications companies (providers): PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia Tbk (Telkom), PT Telekomunikasi Selular (Telkomsel), PT Indosat Tbk, and PT XL Axiata Tbk.
New Era of Prosecution Intelligence: Strengthening Prosecutorial Intelligence
This MoU is a significant milestone as it allows the Attorney General's Office Intelligence Division (Jamintel) to install and operate surveillance equipment for information gathering. The purpose is clear: to fully support law enforcement duties.
The Attorney General's Intelligence Division (Jamintel) Reda Manthovani explained that this cooperation is a strategic step to strengthen the intelligence function of the prosecution.
Currently, business core "Intelligence agencies focus on collecting data and/or information which is then used as material for analysis, processing, and utilized according to the organization's needs," Reda said, quoted from Pikiran-Rakyat.com.
According to him, valid data with the qualification "A1" (very accurate) becomes crucial, especially in cases such as fugitive pursuit, in-depth investigation of cybercrime, to the compilation of comprehensive cross-sector crime analysis.
Strong Legal Foundation, Privacy Still Protected?
The Head of the Legal Publicity Center (Kapuspenkum) of the Attorney General's Office, Harli Siregar, emphasized that this practice of wiretapping is fully legal and has strong legal basis, referring to Article 31 paragraph (3) of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (ITE Law).
The regulation indeed governs interception for law enforcement purposes at the request of law enforcement agencies such as the police or prosecution.
"This is purely because in the context of law enforcement, there needs to be a function that can support and assist with this, so collaboration is necessary," explained Harli. He provided a real example: the effort to trace persons of interest (DPO) often requires intensive tracking through phone numbers.
Nevertheless, Harli emphasized that the public does not need to worry about their private spaces being invaded without limits. "In this context, of course, it does not restrict public privacy space because it must not," he stated firmly.
Parliament's Warning: Oversight and Accountability Become Key
The Attorney General's initiative has drawn direct attention from parliament, particularly regarding the protection of personal data and the potential for abuse of authority.
The Chairman of the Indonesian House of Representatives, Puan Maharani, reminded the Attorney General's Office to ensure that citizens' personal data protection remains safeguarded. "Law enforcement is very important, but the Attorney General must pay attention to the right to the protection of personal data because the right to privacy is a constitutional right," said Puan. She emphasized that such technological collaborations should proceed within the framework of accountability, transparency, and respect for civil rights.
In line with this, Member of the DPR RI Commission III Sarifuddin Sudding supports law enforcement based on technology, but he requests that the mechanism of wiretapping be closely monitored.
"Law enforcement efforts should not infringe on public privacy. Law enforcers must not immediately conduct wiretaps without clear legal purpose," he said. Sudding added that in a democratic rule of law state, wiretapping is merely an extraordinary option that must be carried out according to the legal framework to maintain public trust.
Other member of the DPR Commission III, Martin Tumbelaka, also highlighted the need for procedural accountability. He supported the MoU as long as it was accompanied by strict oversight and involved independent institutions such as the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) and the Information Commission.
"This cooperation must be accompanied by strict oversight mechanisms to prevent abuse of power," Martin said. He added that surveillance should be limited to serious criminal cases, particularly corruption and money laundering, through licensing mechanisms and periodic evaluations.
Both the public and members of the DPR agree: surveillance is legitimate if it is carried out for the sake of justice, as long as it remains within the bounds of the law and is conducted transparently. "A digital democracy must be built with policies that are not only fast and efficient, but also civilized and uphold legal ethics," concludes Sudding.
Post a Comment