PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA TERHADAP PELAKU USAHA WARUNG INTERNET YANG MELAKUKAN INTERSEPSI ATAS KOMPUTER YANG DIGUNAKAN OLEH PENGGUNA JASA STUDI KASUS KOTA TANJUNGPINANG

Abstract

Law Number 19 of 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transaction contained in article 31 paragraph 1 states that every person is prohibited from engaging in interception other than in the authority to carry out law enforcement efforts As for the settlement of cases looking at the legal view of the interception of internet cafe business actors to intercept computers using the cyberindo application against service users and what is the criminal responsibility if the internet cafe business actor intercepts the computer used by the service user. Internet cafe business actors through the Cyberindo application can conduct surveillance in the form of looking at the service user's computer, this authority must be considered so that it does not become an opportunity to commit disgraceful acts. The author uses normative legal research, statutory approach, qualitative analysis, and secondary data to help resolve legal events that occur. In criminal law, to be responsible for a criminal act must also see the element of guilt for the criminal act that has occurred. The implementation of article 31 paragraph 1 of Law Number 19 of 2016 and article 47 of Law Number 19 of 2016 is a rule that regulates interception and criminal sanctions for interception. So basically the supervisory authority exercised should not be used as an opportunity to commit an act that is contrary to law and public order.