When No Human Makes the Decision Digital Agreements Are Legally Binding
Under Article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code, a contract becomes valid once mutual consent is reached. This principle of consensualism applies regardless of whether the agreement is written on paper or formed through digital conversation. In practice, many loan agreements now occur entirely through messaging apps. Problems arise when one party defaults and the only available evidence is a screenshot of the conversation. While Indonesia’s amended Electronic Information and Transactions Law (Law No. 1 of 2024) recognizes electronic information as admissible evidence, screenshots remain vulnerable to manipulation. According to researchers, recognition does not automatically equate to the strength of evidence. “The legal validity of screenshots is relative and conditional. The court requires evidence that the data is authentic, complete, and free from manipulation,” he explained in the journal article.
Research Method and Legal Framework
- The Indonesian Civil Code (KUH Perdata).
- Law No. 11 of 2008 in conjunction with Law No. 1 of 2024 on Electronic Information and Transactions (EIT Law).
- Judicial trends in civil court rulings between 2023 and 2025.
The study also examines legal
doctrines on electronic evidence and evaluates how judges exercise discretion
when assessing digital proof.
Key Findings: A Screenshot Alone Is
Weak Evidence
Empirical data analyzed in the
study reveal significant differences in court outcomes depending on how digital
evidence is preserved and supported.
The success rates in
breach-of-contract cases show a clear pattern:
- Standalone screenshot without metadata: win rate approximately 10–12 percent.
- Screenshot supported by bank transfer records: approximately 68 percent.
- Screenshot combined with electronic signature: approximately 85 percent.
- Screenshot verified through forensic imaging and metadata hashing: up to 94–96 percent.
The highest evidentiary reliability
occurs when forensic imaging techniques confirm that the file has not been
altered since its creation. Digital hashing ensures data integrity and
significantly strengthens judicial confidence. In about 60 percent of observed
cases, defendants attempted to deny liability by claiming their messaging
accounts were hacked. However, when metadata such as IP address synchronization
and timestamp consistency were presented, courts tended to reject such
defenses.
Implications for the Public and
Business Sector
The findings carry important
implications for individuals, small businesses, and informal lenders who rely
on digital communication for financial transactions.
Key practical implications include:
- Parties should systematically archive conversations, including exporting chat logs in .txt or .pdf formats.
- Bank transfers should clearly state the transaction purpose in the description field.
- In high-value disputes, digital forensic audits can dramatically increase the probability of success in court.
- Courts may require original devices for direct examination of messaging applications.
Researchers emphasize that legal certainty in digital transactions depends not only on regulatory recognition, but also on procedural discipline in preserving electronic evidence.
Author Profile
Nanin Koeswidi Astuti, S.H., M.H.,
is a legal scholar and lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Indonesian Christian University.
Her expertise includes: civil law, digital transaction
law, consumer protection in e-commerce, and legal transformation in the digital
economy.
Sources
Nanin Koeswidi Astuti. “Juridical
Analysis of the Validity of Electronic Evidence in the Form of Instant
Messaging Screenshots in Loan Agreement Disputes.” International Journal of
Law Analytics (IJLA), Vol. 4, No. 1, 2026, hlm. 119–130.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59890/ijla.v4i1.167
URL: https://slamultitechpublisher.my.id/index.php/ijla
0 Komentar