The phenomenon of fraud conducted through phone calls and even video calls using the faces and voices of well-known individuals has become increasingly widespread. These schemes utilize artificial intelligence (AI) to convince victims into engaging in business transactions, online loans, or even disclosing personal data. This condition demonstrates that technology is capable of generating falsified evidence that appears genuine and convincing, even when such events never actually occurred.

Since the enactment of Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions and its amendments (the ITE Law), Article 5 paragraph (2) essentially provides that electronic evidence is legally admissible in court proceedings. This means that screenshots, video recordings, digitally signed documents, and other electronic documents have the status of evidence as long as they meet the criteria of integrity and authenticity. Integrity refers to the completeness of the electronic document as a whole, while authenticity means that the document can be accounted for in explaining the facts or circumstances (vide Article 5 of the ITE Law).

The potential issue arises from the inherent nature of electronic documents, which can be manipulated through advanced artificial intelligence. Even the metadata of electronic messages can be altered through AI. As electronic documents can be modified, the authenticity of the data can become obscured, thereby raising doubts about the reliability of the electronic evidence.

In civil procedural law, the primary purpose of proof is to ascertain formal truth, considering that the submitted evidence forms the basis for the court’s judgment. Electronic evidence is deemed admissible only if the information contained therein is accessible, displayable, its integrity is assured, and it is accountable. However, electronic evidence is vulnerable to manipulation, fabrication, or alteration that may affect its authenticity and the truth of the information it contains. Therefore, in determining the integrity and authenticity of electronic evidence, verification is required to ensure that the document has not been altered and originates from a legitimate source. To ensure this, specialized expertise such as digital forensic experts is needed to examine system logs, metadata traces, or conduct hash verification to confirm the validity of electronic evidence and ensure that no manipulation or tampering has occurred.

Nevertheless, forensic examination alone, when analyzed, is insufficient to assess whether electronic evidence contains potential manipulation. This is because digital forensic analysis is typically conducted ex post, that is, after suspicion of manipulation arises. Meanwhile, in practice, the types of electronic evidence continue to evolve and grow increasingly complex. Thus, preventive measures (ex ante mechanisms) are required through the application of the principle of prudence, consistent with Article 3 of the ITE Law.

One form of preventive implementation is the development of the Electronic Certification Provider System (PSrE) as regulated in Article 16 of the ITE Law in conjunction with Government Regulation No. 71 of 2019 on the Implementation of Electronic Systems and Transactions, and the Regulation of the Minister of Communication and Informatics No. 11 of 2022 on Governance of Electronic Certification Providers. An Electronic Certification Provider (PSrE) is a legal entity serving as a trusted third party responsible for issuing and auditing electronic certificates. A PSrE may consist of domestic or foreign institutions registered and domiciled in Indonesia, and must be verified by the Government of Indonesia.

Fundamentally, a PSrE is not a form of evidence; rather, it is a verification mechanism ensuring that electronic evidence is accountable and holds legal force. Any electronic document accompanied by a PSrE certificate indicates that the user’s identity has been verified, all changes to the document can be detected, and the time of such changes is automatically recorded (timestamped). In essence, this mechanism ensures that the document meets the criteria of integrity and authenticity (vide Article 5 of the ITE Law), as such qualities are guaranteed through a system monitored and officially verified by the government.

With the existence of PSrE certification, judges and litigating parties have a clearer basis for assessing the authenticity and integrity of electronic documents without immediately resorting to complex technical examinations. PSrE acts as a preventive measure to ensure that documents are not easily manipulated or forged, thereby preserving confidence that the submitted documents are truly intact and originate from legitimate parties.

Thus, one of the guarantees of the authenticity of electronic evidence is the use of electronically certified documents issued by PSrE. Meanwhile, other digital documents may be verified through digital forensic experts. In this digital and AI-driven era, it is no longer sufficient for evidence to merely appear genuine or convincing; instead, verification of the authenticity of electronic or digital documents is essential.

Therefore, if GGPeople intends to submit electronic documents, they must first validate their authenticity to ensure that each submitted document is secure and protected from rejection as court evidence.