Without Clear Regulations, The Prosecutor's And Telecommunications Operator Wiretapping Agreement Is Very Harmful To The Community

The wiretapping agreement between the Attorney General's Office and four cellular operators is considered very detrimental to the public. (Unsplash)

The Attorney General's Office is collaborating with four telecommunications operators to facilitate the wiretapping process in the context of legal action. However, according to observers and digital activists, this cooperation is problematic.

This collaboration was carried out with PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia Tbk (Telkom), PT Telekomunikasi Selular (Telkomsel), PT Indosat Tbk, and PT XLSMART Telecom Sejahtera Tbk.

Deputy Attorney General for Intelligence (Jamintel) Reda Manthovani explained that this collaboration will make it easier for the investigative team to access limited data and information.

"This memorandum of understanding focuses on exchanging and utilizing data and/or information in the context of law enforcement, including installing and operating information wiretapping devices and providing telecommunications information recordings," said Reda in a written statement, Wednesday (25/6/2025).

However, wiretapping by the AGO has drawn criticism from various groups. Moreover, the prosecutor's office does not have a wiretapping law so that this policy has the potential to violate the rights to protect personal data.

Telecommunications expert and Executive Director of the Indonesia ICT Institute Heru Sutadi said wiretapping by law enforcement officials such as the Prosecutor's Office, Police, Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), to the State Intelligence Agency (BIN), or other institutions that have this authority must still be carried out carefully and in accordance with legal provisions.

Heru said the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the Attorney General's Office and the four telecommunications operators sparked public concern about violations of personal data protection.

"Based on the Telecommunications Law (Unlaw), wiretapping is allowed by law enforcement officers who have the authority to conduct wiretapping or are called lawful intercepts," said Heru.

"It's just that wiretapping must not be done haphazardly. It must be clear who was tapped, why was it tapped, what case, and timeframe," he added.

For information, the lawful intercept is wiretapping activities carried out by law enforcement officers with official permits and authorities based on the law. The goal is to gather evidence in investigations of serious cases such as corruption, terrorism, or drugs.

For this reason, he emphasized the importance of the audit mechanism for wiretapping activities so that this activity can be accounted for and prevent abuse of authority.

"Do not let wiretapping become a spy tool outside of cases that may be tapped," he said.

DPR Speaker Puan Maharani participated in warning about potential violations of personal data that could be committed by the prosecutor's office. Although law enforcement is very important, Puan emphasized that the prosecutor's office must continue to pay attention to the right to protect personal data because private rights are constitutional rights.

Wiretapping, said Wahyudi Djafar, cannot be done arbitrarily because it is limiting a person's human rights. Therefore, he assessed that restrictions on wiretapping must remain. The form can be in the form of provisions, such as wiretapping must receive a court order or for cases with sufficient evidence.

"It can't then generically carry out monitoring," said Wahyudi Djafar, digital policy researcher from the Raksha Initiatives.

Law Number 11 of 2021 concerning Amendments to Law Number 16 of 2004 concerning the Attorney General's Office of the Republic of Indonesia on 30 C states "coupling based on a special law regulating wiretapping and organizing a monitoring center in the field of criminal acts."

However, Wahyudi emphasized that the Wiretapping Law does not yet exist, so the prosecutor's office does not yet have regulations governing wiretapping restrictions.

Without clear wiretapping restrictions, Wahyudi assessed that the Prosecutor's Office can access data continuously, carry out continuous wiretapping of personal communication through providers-provider telecomunication that makes agreements with the AGO.

"This is very, very threatening to protect the right to privacy of citizens," Wahyudi concluded.