Etika dan Keadilan dalam Penggunaan Bukti Digital Hasil Forensik Siber di Persidangan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25139/lex.v10i2.11984Keywords:
Forensik Siber, Bukti Digital, Keadilan Prosedural, Standar Daubert, UU ITEAbstract
Perkembangan teknologi informasi telah mengubah paradigma pembuktian dalam hukum acara pidana, di mana bukti digital kini menjadi instrumen krusial bagi penegak hukum. Namun, sifat bukti digital yang volatil, mudah dimodifikasi, dan tidak berwujud menimbulkan tantangan serius terhadap etika profesi forensik dan keadilan prosedural. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis dimensi etika dan keadilan dalam penggunaan bukti digital hasil forensik siber dengan menggunakan perspektif teori keadilan John Rawls serta standar internasional seperti Daubert dan ISO/IEC 27037. Melalui metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan konseptual dan perbandingan literatur asing, penelitian ini mengkaji dua topik utama: integrasi standar etika internasional dalam validasi alat forensik dan penguatan prinsip Equality of Arms dalam proses ajudikasi digital. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa keabsahan bukti digital tidak cukup hanya bersandar pada integritas teknis (hashing), melainkan harus melalui proses auditabilitas yang transparan untuk mencegah bias algoritmik, terutama dengan hadirnya kecerdasan buatan. Temuan ini menekankan perlunya reformasi hukum acara yang mengakomodasi hak Digital Habeas Corpus bagi terdakwa untuk menjamin keseimbangan posisi hukum di hadapan negara. Artikel ini menyimpulkan bahwa keadilan dalam ruang siber hanya dapat dicapai apabila teknologi forensik diposisikan sebagai alat pencari kebenaran objektif, bukan sekadar instrumen pemidanaan.
References
Aleisa, N. (2026). The Study of Digital Forensics in KSA: Education, and Prosecution Capabilities: A Needs-Based Analysis. Electronics, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics15020316
Aleke, N. T., & Trigui, M. (2025). Legal and Ethical Challenges in Digital Forensics Investigations. In Digital Forensics in the Age of AI. IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
Ashalirrohman, Y. (2024). Asset Forfeiture for the Offense of Illicit Enrichment: Between Eradication and Deterrence. Lex Journal: Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan, 8(1), 1–12.
Association for Computing Machinery. (2018). ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics
Bhatti, N. (2026). The Use of Digital Evidence in Criminal Proceedings. American Journal of Society and Law, 5(1), 10–19. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajsl.v5i1.7211
Digital Forensics Certification Board. (2026). Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct. https://dfcb.org/code-of-ethics-and-standards-of-professional-conduct/
Ferguson, R. I., Renaud, K., Wilford, S., & Irons, A. (2020). Precept: a framework for ethical digital forensics investigations. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2019-0097
Filletti, S. (2026). Efficiency over Equity: Why the Speed of Digital Investigation Extinguishes Defence Rights. Malta Journal of Legal Studies, 1–8. https://brill.com/view/journals/mjls/aop/article-10.1163-30508762-00000008/article-10.1163-30508762-00000008.xml?ebody=pdf-130820
Haji, I. A., Mohammed, S. D., & Mousa, K. M. (2026). Blockchain based chain of custody and digital evidence legality in post conflict prosecutions. Frontiers Media SA, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2026.1801364
Herman, Handrawan, Haris, O. K., Abdullah, S. A., Rizky, A., & Indah, S. R. (2024). Use of Digital Forensics in Proofing the Criminal Offense of Damage to Good Name in Social Media Based on the Law of Information and Electronic Transactions. Halu Oleo Legal Research, 6(2), 588–603.
Imam, F. (2017). Computer Forensics: Legal and Ethical Principles. https://www.infosecinstitute.com/resources/digital-forensics/computer-forensics-legal-ethical-principles/
Ismail, I., & Ariffin, K. A. Z. (2025). The admissibility of digital evidence from open-source forensic tools: Development of a framework for legal acceptance. PLoS One, 20(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331683
Konfirmity Pte Ltd. (2026). ISO/IEC 27037: Understanding its role in compliance and security (2026). https://www.konfirmity.com/glossary/iso-iec-27037
Lasagni, G. (2025). Admissibility of Digital Evidence. In V. Franssen & S. Tosza (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Digital Evidence in Criminal Investigations (pp. 126–152). Cambridge University Press.
Mandayam, R. (2025). Ethical Considerations in Digital Forensic. International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering & Multidisciplinary Physical Sciences, 13(1), 1–4.
Morić, Z., Dakić, V., & Biškupić, I. O. (2026). An Empirical Assessment of Digital Forensic Process Reliability Using Integrated ISO/IEC 27037 and 27041 Standards. Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/jcp6020057
Muhaimin. (2020). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Mataram University Press.
Palmer, G. (2016). Locard’s Exchange Principle and the Daubert Test. https://zymitry.com/locards-exchange-principle-daubert-test/
Pramata, A. G. (2020). Analisis Kekuatan dan Nilai Pembuktian Alat Bukti Elektronik Berwujud CCTV (Closed Circuit Television) Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 20/PUU-XIV/2016 dalam Hukum Acara Pidana. Jurnal Verstek, 8(3), 392–400.
Ramos, V. C. (2023). The EPPO and the equality of arms between the prosecutor and the defence. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844231157078
Rustamaji, M., Sitompul, S. M., & Khoiruddin, A. R. (2026). Reforming the Role of Judges in Assessing Evidence Authenticity and Legality: A Comparative Study Using the Exclusionary Rule Approach. Media Iuris, 9(1), 153–180. https://doi.org/10.20473/mi.v9i1.77218
Sangari, ziba N., & Mohammadi, A. (2025). Admissibility of Digital Evidence at the International Criminal Court. Journal of Criminal Law Research, 13(48), 41–84. https://doi.org/10.22054/jclr.2025.81549.2697
Setiawan, E., & Hartiwiningsih. (2024). Pemanfaatan Digital Forensik dan Teknologi Informasi dalam Proses Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Pemalsuan Dokumen Elektronik. Prosiding APPIHI. https://prosiding.appihi.or.id/index.php/PROSEMNASHUK/article/download/39/39
Sukarta, D. T. W., Akbar, M. G. G., & Abas, M. (2025). Akibat Hukum Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tentang Kerusuhan dalam Ruang Siber Bukan Sebagai Tindak Pidana (Studi Putusan Nomor 105/PUU-XXII/2024). Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora Dan Politik (JIHHP), 6(1), 306–315.
Tiba, S. K. S. (2025). Implikasi Penolakan Bukti Elektronik Tanpa Verifikasi Digital Forensik: Studi Putusan dan Analisis Yuridis. Media Hukum Indonesia (MHI), 4(1), 865–868. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17946561
Vanessa, & Firmansyah, H. (2025). Analysis of the Validity of Electronic Evidence in Criminal Trial Proceedings and the Implementation of Its Admissibility (Judgment Study). Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.21070/ijler.v20i4.1395
Wang, X., Wu, Y. C., & Ma, Z. (2024). Blockchain in the courtroom: exploring its evidentiary significance and procedural implications in U.S. judicial processes. Frontiers Blockchain, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2024.1306058
Wikipedia. (2026). Locard’s exchange principle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locard%27s_exchange_principle