The 'No Viral, No Justice' Phenomenon in the Digital Age: Implications of Public Pressure on the Independence and Objectivity of Criminal Investigations

Main Article Content

Diana Alpiani Safitri

Abstract

This legal study examines the viral justice phenomenon alongside its profound implications for the independence and objectivity of Indonesian criminal investigations. As digital vigilantism replaces formal reporting, algorithms increasingly dictate law enforcement priorities, creating a populist justice ecosystem. The research evaluates recent cases to demonstrate how immense public pressure induces confirmation bias and tunnel vision among investigators. Consequently, this digital coercion directly accelerates procedural errors and wrongful arrests. Furthermore, the analysis highlights a critical tension between impulsive demands for instant retribution on social media and the rigorous judicial scrutiny mandated by the new Criminal Procedure Code. To safeguard procedural integrity and constitutional equality, this article recommends establishing mandatory delay periods and tiered supervisory protocols within police departments. These vital institutional reforms will ensure that democratic policing adheres strictly to the objective rule of law, rather than succumbing to capricious algorithmic dictates or transient online mob outrage continuously emerging nationwide today.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section

Articles

How to Cite

The ’No Viral, No Justice’ Phenomenon in the Digital Age: Implications of Public Pressure on the Independence and Objectivity of Criminal Investigations. (2026). Smart: Journal of Criminal Law Review and Analysis, 1(1), 71-86. https://ejournal.smartpedia.co.id/index.php/SCrim/article/view/31

References

[1] A. J. S. Runturambi, M. Aswindo, and E. Meiyani, “No Viral No Justice: A Criminological Review of Social Media-Based Law Enforcement from the Perspective of Progressive Law,” J. IUS Kaji. Huk. dan Keadilan, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 177–195, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.29303/ius.v12i1.1361.

[2] B. Alam, “Kapolri Perintahkan Anggota Responsif Setiap Kasus Tanpa Harus Tunggu Viral,” Berita Nasional. [Online]. Available: https://beritanasional.com/detail/90762/kapolri-perintahkan-anggota-responsif-setiap-kasus-tanpa-harus-tunggu-viral

[3] Q. Qudratullah, M. Nohong, M. Iqbal, R. Susanti, and O. M. T. Alkanan, “Towards Discursive Justice: An Integrative Foucault-Islam Framework for Critical Media Discourse Analysis in Justice Issues,” J. Ilm. Al-Syir’ah, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 156–169, 2025, doi: 10.30984/jis.v23i1.3196.

[4] Burhayan and Mujiburrahman, “Legal Protection for Victims Wrongly Arrested in the Investigation Process in Indonesia,” Multidiscip. Indones. Cent. J., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1502–1511, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.62567/micjo.v3i1.2242.

[5] M. Rahmawati, “Draconian and Illiberal: Indonesia’s New KUHP Is Worse Than the Old One,” Indonesia at Melbourne. [Online]. Available: https://indonesiaatmelbourne.unimelb.edu.au/draconian-and-illiberal-indonesias-new-kuhap-is-worse-than-the-old-one/

[6] R. Muhammad, S. M. Sitompul, T. S. Zafarovich, and R. Embong, “The Reduction of Criminal Justice Policy in Indonesia: Justice versus Virality,” J. Hum. Rights, Cult. Leg. Syst., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 442–472, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.53955/jhcls.v5i2.637.

[7] A. Wahid, R. Rohadi, and A. Kusyandi, “‘No Viral No Justice’ Phenomenon in Indonesian Law Enforcement: Acceleration or Threat to Justice ?,” Reformasi Huk., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 36–51, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.46257/jrh.v29i1.1183.

[8] D. Watkins and M. Burton, Research Methods in Law. London: Routledge, 2025. doi: 10.4324/9781032710372.

[9] A. Azis, “Law Enforcement Through Social Media Pressure,” Law Justice, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 89–97, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.23917/laj.v7i1.654.

[10] A. Fatakh, “A Juridical Review Of The ‘No Viral No Justice’ Phenomenon As A Tool Of Social Control Over Law Enforcement Officers In The Digital Era,” Int. J. Humanit. Educ. Soc. Sci., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 652–662, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.55227/ijhess.v5i2.1801.

[11] S. Lenz, T. Zohrevand, E. Rassin, and B. Verschuere, “What happened and what proves you wrong? Combatting confirmation bias in police investigations through evidence reconstruction and falsification,” PLoS One, vol. 21, no. 1, p. e0327036, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0327036.

[12] L. Brimbal, D. J. Atkinson, and C. A. Meissner, “The effect of confirmation bias and racial stereotypes on perceptions of guilt and interrogation strategy decisions,” Appl. Cogn. Psychol., vol. 38, no. 1, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1002/acp.4159.

[13] H. Haniyah, “Legal Reconstruction of Error in Persona Cases: Justice Enforcement Challenges Based on Due Process of Law Principle,” Reformasi Huk., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 168–186, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.46257/jrh.v28i3.1039.

[14] I. Sandiya, A. H. S. Ghafur, and S. Yuliatiningtyas, “Transforming Democratic Policing in the Digital Era for Law Enforcement Accountability in Indonesia,” J. Law Leg. Reform, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1723–1760, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.15294/jllr.v6i4.30554.

[15] E. A. Priyono, I. G. A. K. R. Handayani, and M. Rustamaji‬, “Legal Construction of the Consequences of a Judge’s Verdict Proven to Involve Receiving Gratuities in Adjudicating a Case,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Law, Economics & good Governance (ICLAW 2025), 2025, pp. 309–328. doi: 10.2991/978-2-38476-519-5_25.

[16] A. S. Irawan, “The Potential of Generative Artificial Intelligence Based on Applications in Judicial Supervision in An Efforts to Reduce Corruption, Collusion, and Nepotism,” J. Huk. dan Peradil., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 599–628, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.25216/jhp.14.3.2025.599-628.

[17] A. Qurniawan, “Eksistensi Praperadilan Pasca Dihapuskannya Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan dalam RKUHAP,” Mari News MA RI. [Online]. Available: https://marinews.mahkamahagung.go.id/artikel/eksistensi-praperadilan-pasca-dihapuskannya-hakim-pemeriksa-02S

Similar Articles

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