Constitution in the Age of Algorithms: Reinterpreting the Rule of Law in the Context of Digital Constitutionalism in Indonesia

Authors

  • Marzuki Lubis Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara
  • Muhammad Ridwan Lubis Universitas Muslim Nusantara Al- Wasliyah

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70062/ljrj.v2i3.157

Keywords:

Algorithmic Governance, Constitutional Rights, Digital Constitutionalism, Digital Human Rights, Rule of Law

Abstract

The rapid expansion of algorithm-driven digital platforms has transformed the relationship between the state, citizens, and private technology companies, creating constitutional challenges beyond conventional constitutional law. Algorithmic governance increasingly enables private platforms to influence freedom of expression, privacy, access to information, and other constitutional rights, prompting the emergence of Digital Constitutionalism. However, existing scholarship largely emphasizes European and North American perspectives, while Indonesia remains underexplored. This study examines how the rule of law should be reinterpreted to address the constitutional implications of algorithmic governance in Indonesia. Using normative legal research with constitutional, statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, it analyzes constitutional provisions, legislation, judicial decisions, international legal instruments, and academic literature. The findings show that Indonesia's constitutional framework still focuses on state–citizen relations, despite the growing constitutional influence of digital platforms. Therefore, rule of law principles—including legality, legal certainty, due process, transparency, accountability, and equality before the law—should be reconstructed to accommodate algorithmic governance. The study proposes an Indonesian Digital Constitutionalism Framework that strengthens constitutional protection of digital human rights while providing guidance for constitutional reform, digital governance regulation, and democratic accountability in the digital era.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Balkin, J. M. (2018). Free Speech in the Algorithmic Society: Big Data, Private Governance, and New School Speech Regulation. UC Davis Law Review, 51(3), 1149–1210.

Celeste, E. (2022). Digital Constitutionalism: The Role of Internet Bills of Rights. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003247058

Cohen, J. E. (2019). Between Truth and Power: The Legal Constructions of Informational Capitalism. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190246691.001.0001

De Gregorio, G. (2022). Digital Constitutionalism in Europe: Reframing Rights and Powers in the Algorithmic Society. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009071473

Dicey, A. V. (1885). Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution. London: Macmillan.

European Parliament and Council. (2016). Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the Protection of Natural Persons with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data, and Repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). Official Journal of the European Union, L119, 1–88.

European Parliament and Council. (2022). Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on Contestable and Fair Markets in the Digital Sector and Amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Digital Markets Act). Official Journal of the European Union, L265, 1–66.

European Parliament and Council. (2022). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market for Digital Services and Amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act). Official Journal of the European Union, L277, 1–102.

European Parliament and Council. (2022b). Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on Contestable and Fair Markets in the Digital Sector and Amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Digital Markets Act). Official Journal of the European Union, L265, 1–66.

Hildebrandt, M. (2020). The Issue of Bias in AI and the Principle of Equality. In L. A. Bygrave, M. M. Madden, & M. Hildebrandt (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Digital Technology and Society. Oxford University Press.

Hutchinson, T., & Duncan, N. (2012). Defining and Describing What We Do: Doctrinal Legal Research. Deakin Law Review, 17(1), 83–119. https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2012vol17no1art70

Lessig, L. (2006). Code: Version 2.0. Basic Books.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). OECD Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence. OECD Legal Instruments. Paris: OECD.

Örücü, E. (2006). Developing Comparative Law. In M. Reimann & R. Zimmermann (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law (pp. 43–65). Oxford University Press.

Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Press.

Pasquale, F. (2015). The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information. Harvard University Press.

Republic of Indonesia. (1945). The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (as amended).

Republic of Indonesia. (2005). Law Number 12 of 2005 concerning the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2005 Number 119.

Republic of Indonesia. (2008). Law Number 11 of 2008 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions. State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2008 Number 58.

Republic of Indonesia. (2022). Law Number 27 of 2022 concerning Personal Data Protection. State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2022 Number 196.

Smits, J. M. (2017). What Is Legal Doctrine? On the Aims and Methods of Legal-Dogmatic Research. In R. van Gestel, H.-W. Micklitz, & E. L. Rubin (Eds.), Rethinking Legal Scholarship: A Transatlantic Dialogue (pp. 207–228). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316688920.011

Strauss, D. A. (2010). The Living Constitution. Oxford University Press.

Suzor, N. P. (2019). Lawless: The Secret Rules That Govern Our Digital Lives. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108666426

Thompson, B. Z. (2004). On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory. Cambridge University Press.

UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Van Hoecke, M. (ed.). (2011). Methodologies of Legal Research: Which Kind of Method for What Kind of Discipline? Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Floridi, L. (2017). Why a Right to Explanation of Automated Decision-Making Does Not Exist in the General Data Protection Regulation. International Data Privacy Law, 7(2), 76–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipx005

Yeung, K. (2018). Algorithmic Regulation: A Critical Interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12158

Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs.

Downloads

Published

2026-07-24

How to Cite

Marzuki Lubis, & Muhammad Ridwan Lubis. (2026). Constitution in the Age of Algorithms: Reinterpreting the Rule of Law in the Context of Digital Constitutionalism in Indonesia. Law and Justice Research Journal, 2(3), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.70062/ljrj.v2i3.157

Similar Articles

1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.