Reconstruction of Digital Constitutionalism in the Indonesian Constitutional System: Protection of Citizens’ Constitutional Rights in the Era of Digital Platform Domination

Authors

  • Wiredarme Institut Pemerintahan Dalam Negeri Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62894/vt15tc93

Keywords:

digital constitutionalism; constitutional rights; digital platforms; Indonesia; algorithmic accountability.

Abstract

This study aims to reconstruct digital constitutionalism within the Indonesian constitutional system in response to the increasing dominance of digital platforms over citizens’ constitutional rights. The study addresses the problem that freedom of expression, privacy, equality, access to information, democratic participation, and procedural fairness are increasingly exercised within privately governed digital infrastructures. This research uses a qualitative legal method with a normative-juridical approach. It applies statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches by examining the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, human rights law, electronic information regulation, personal data protection law, relevant policy documents, and recent scholarly literature on digital constitutionalism, platform governance, and algorithmic accountability. The findings show that Indonesia’s digital legal framework remains fragmented and has not yet formed an integrated constitutional architecture for protecting citizens from both state power and private digital platform power. Digital platforms have acquired constitutional significance because they regulate speech, data, visibility, access, and participation through content moderation, algorithmic systems, and data-driven governance. This study proposes a hybrid model of digital constitutionalism that connects constitutional rights, state obligations, platform responsibilities, algorithmic accountability, due process, and effective remedies. The contribution of this study lies in placing the Indonesian Constitution at the centre of digital rights protection and offering a rights-based framework for governing platform power in Indonesia’s democratic constitutional order.

References

Attidhira, S. W., & Permana, Y. S. (2022). Review of personal data protection legal regulations in Indonesia. Awang Long Law Review, 5(1), 280–294. https://doi.org/10.56301/awl.v5i1.562

Cobbe, J., Veale, M., & Singh, J. (2023). Understanding accountability in algorithmic supply chains. Big Data & Society, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231203651

De Gregorio, G. (2022). Digital constitutionalism across the Atlantic. Global Constitutionalism, 11(2), 297–324. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381722000016

De Gregorio, G., & Radu, R. (2022). Digital constitutionalism in the new era of internet governance. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 30(1), 68–87. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaac004

Falkner, G. (2024). Digital sovereignty: Rhetoric and reality. Journal of European Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2024.2358984

Fauzan, M. P. N., & A., M. Y. (2022). Digital constitutionalism era in the development of banking law in Indonesia. Journal of Central Banking Law and Institutions, 1(3), 455–480. https://doi.org/10.21098/jcli.v1i3.31

Golia, A., Jr. (2024). Critique of digital constitutionalism: Deconstruction and reconstruction from a societal perspective. Global Constitutionalism, 13(3), 488–518. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381723000126

González-Bailón, S., & Lelkes, Y. (2022). Do social media undermine social cohesion? A critical review. Social Issues and Policy Review, 17(1), 155–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12091

Gsenger, R. (2025). Platform governance under the Digital Services Act. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2590561

Leerssen, P. (2023). An end to shadow banning? Transparency rights in the Digital Services Act between content moderation and curation. Computer Law & Security Review, 48, 105790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105790

Mökander, J., Juneja, P., Watson, D. S., & Floridi, L. (2024). The U.S. Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2022 vs. the EU Artificial Intelligence Act: What can they learn from each other? Minds and Machines. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-024-09693-y

Muniz da Conceição, L. H. (2024). A constitutional reflector? Assessing societal and digital constitutionalism in Meta’s Oversight Board. Global Constitutionalism, 13(3), 557–590. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381723000394

Muniz da Conceição, L. H. (2025). The quantum state of the individual in platform governance: Digital constitutionalism and global democratisation. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2492572

Quintais, J. P., Katzenbach, C., Schwemer, S. F., Dergacheva, D., Riis, T., Mezei, P., Harkai, I., & Magalhães, J. C. (2024). Copyright content moderation in the European Union: State of the art, ways forward and policy recommendations. IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 55, 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01409-5

Roberts, J. (2025). Combatting mis- and disinformation in the digital age. Griffith Law Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2025.2522564

Sander, B. (2021). Democratic disruption in the age of social media: Between marketized and structural conceptions of human rights law. European Journal of International Law, 32(1), 159–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chab022

Santos, A. (2025). Holding platforms accountable in the fight against disinformation. International Communication Gazette. https://doi.org/10.1177/17480485251348550

Shang, Z. (2025). Shifting platform governance: Examining participatory governance in digital platforms. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2025.2520004

Söderlund, K., Engström, E., Haresamudram, K., Larsson, S., & Strimling, P. (2024). Regulating high-reach AI: On transparency directions in the Digital Services Act. Internet Policy Review, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.14763/2024.1.1746

Syailendra, M. R., Lie, G., & Sudiro, A. (2024). Personal data protection law in Indonesia: Challenges and opportunities. Indonesia Law Review, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v14n2.4

Terzis, P. (2024). Against digital constitutionalism. European Law Open, 3(2), 336–352. https://doi.org/10.1017/elo.2024.15

Trithara, D. (2024). Agents of platform governance: Analyzing U.S. civil society’s role in contesting online content moderation. Telecommunications Policy, 48(4), 102735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102735

Tsamados, A., Aggarwal, N., Cowls, J., Morley, J., Roberts, H., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2022). The ethics of algorithms: Key problems and solutions. AI & Society, 37, 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01154-8

Young, A. R. (2024). Governing the digital economy: Transatlantic regulatory differences and digital policy. Journal of European Integration. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2024.2398429

Zeng, J., & Kaye, D. B. V. (2022). From content moderation to visibility moderation: A case study of platform governance on TikTok. Policy & Internet, 14(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.287

Downloads

Published

2025-11-30

Issue

Section

Multidisciplinary Article

How to Cite

Wiredarme. (2025). Reconstruction of Digital Constitutionalism in the Indonesian Constitutional System: Protection of Citizens’ Constitutional Rights in the Era of Digital Platform Domination. International Journal of Scientific Research, 2(03), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.62894/vt15tc93