Admissibility of Artificial Intelligence as Electronic Evidence: Comparative Perspectives from Indonesia, the United States, and Japan
Keywords:
Admissibility, Artificial Intelligence, Comparative Law, Electronic Evidence, Legal ReformAbstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into digital forensic and evidentiary processes, raising unresolved doctrinal questions in criminal procedure law. In Indonesia, although electronic evidence is formally recognized, the law does not yet provide specific admissibility standards for AI-based materials, particularly regarding authenticity, methodological reliability, process traceability, explainability, and accountability. This study examines the admissibility of AI as electronic evidence in Indonesia and compares it with legal approaches in the United States and Japan. This study employs a normative juridical method using statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches to analyze the evidentiary frameworks of the three jurisdictions. The findings show that the United States emphasizes expert gatekeeping and digital authentication, while Japan adopts a softer regulatory model centered on traceability, documentation, and actor accountability. By contrast, Indonesia, still lacks specific procedural standards for assessing AI-generated outputs beyond the general recognition of electronic evidence. This article argues that the key legal issue is no longer whether electronic evidence is admissible in general, but how AI-based evidence should be evaluated in a legally reliable and accountable manner. The scientific contribution of this study lies in proposing a five-parameter evaluative model for AI admissibility—covering authenticity and integrity, process traceability, model performance, identity verification, and accountability. This model is offered as a normative reference for future reform of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, while safeguarding legal certainty and justice.
Downloads
References
Ali, Zainuddin. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Bengkulu: Sinar Grafika, 2021.
Ashley, Kevin D. Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analytics: New Tools for Law Practice in the Digital Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316761380.
Behrens, Mark A., and Andrew J. Trask. “Federal Rule of Evidence 702: A History and Guide to the 2023 Amendments Governing Expert Evidence.” Texas A&M Law Review 12, no. 1 (2024): 43. https://doi.org/10.37419/LR.V12.I1.2.
Biedermann, Alex, and Timothy Lau. “Decisionalizing the Problem of Reliance on Expert and Machine Evidence.” Law, Probability and Risk 00 (2024): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgae007.
Casey, Anthony J., and Anthony Niblett. “The Death of Rules and Standards.” Indiana Law Journal 92, no. 4 (2017): 1401–47. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2693826.
Casino, Fran, Claudia Pina, Pablo López-Aguilar, Edgar Batista, Agusti Solanas, and Constantinos Patsakis. “SoK: Cross-Border Criminal Investigations and Digital Evidence.” Journal of Cybersecurity 8, no. 1 (January 2022): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1093/cybsec/tyac014.
Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. “Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses.” Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute, 2024. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702.
Digital Agency, Japan. “Act on Electronic Signatures and Certification Business (Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act) and Related Laws and Ordinances.” June 2024. https://www.digital.go.jp.
“Federal Rule of Evidence 702: Judicial Conference Amends Rule 702.” Harvard Law Review 138, no. 3 (January 2025): 899.
Gebru, Timnit, Jamie Morgenstern, Briana Vecchione, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan, Hanna Wallach, Hal Daumé III, and Kate Crawford. “Datasheets for Datasets.” Communications of the ACM (New York, NY, USA) 64, no. 12 (2021): 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1145/3458723.
Gless, Sabine, Emily Silverman, and Thomas Weigend. “If Robots Cause Harm, Who Is to Blame? Self-Driving Cars and Criminal Liability.” New Criminal Law Review 19, no. 3 (August 2016): 412–36. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2016.19.3.412.
Grimm, Paul W., Maura R. Grossmann, and Gordon V. Cormack. “Artificial Intelligence as Evidence.” Law, Technology and Society Journal 12, no. 2 (2023): 145–67. https://doi.org/10.5555/ai.evidence.2023.002.
Hakim, Hary Abdul, Chrisna Bagus Edhita Praja, and Sung Ming-Hsi. “AI in Law: Urgency of the Implementation of Artificial Intelligence on Law Enforcement in Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum Novelty 14, no. 1 (April 2023): 122–34. https://doi.org/10.26555/novelty.v14i1.a25943.
Hildebrandt, Mireille. Law for Computer Scientists and Other Folk. First edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2020.
Inoue, Kensuke, and Chika Kamata. “Japan’s Emerging Framework for Responsible AI: Legislation, Guidelines and Guidance.” International Bar Association, July 2025. https://www.ibanet.org/japans-emerging-framework-for-responsible-ai-legislation-guidelines-and-guidance.
Jaelani, Abdul Kadir, Resti Dian Luthviati, Ahmad Siboy, Sholahuddin Al Fatih, and Muhammad Jihadul Hayat. “Artificial Intelligence Policy in Promoting Indonesian Tourism.” Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Konstitusi, June 15, 2024, 109–37. https://doi.org/10.24090/volksgeist.v7i1.10623.
Japan AI Safety Institute (J-AISI). Fact Sheet of AI Safety in Japan 2024. Tokyo, Japan: Japan AI Safety Institute, 2025. https://j-aisi.or.jp.
Kapoor, Sayash, and Arvind Narayanan. “Leakage and the Reproducibility Crisis in Machine-Learning-Based Science.” Patterns 4, no. 9 (September 2023): 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100804.
Kattnig, Markus, Alessa Angerschmid, Thomas Reichel, and Roman Kern. “Assessing Trustworthy AI: Technical and Legal Perspectives of Fairness in AI.” Computer Law & Security Review 55 (2024): 106053. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106053.
Legal Information Institute. “Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses.” Cornell Law School, 2025. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702.
———. “Rule 901. Authenticating or Identifying Evidence.” Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute, 2025. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_901.
Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School. “Rule 902. Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating.” Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute, 2025. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_902.
Maeda, Yoji, David G. Litt, and Emiko Morisato. “Current Status of Electronic Signatures Law and Presumption of Authenticity in Japan: Can a Handwritten Signature or ‘Hanko’ Be Omitted?” O’Melveny Insights, March 10, 2021. https://www.omm.com/insights/alerts-publications/current-status-of-electronic-signatures-law-and-presumption-of-authenticity-in-japan-can-a-handwritten-signature-or-hanko-be-omitted/.
Maskanah, Ummi. “Artificial Intelligence in Civil Justice: Comparative Legal Analysis and Practical Frameworks for Indonesia.” Jambura Law Review 7, no. 1 (January 2025): 225–42. https://doi.org/10.33756/jlr.v7i1.27786.
Massachusetts Court System. “Section 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses.” 2025. https://www.mass.gov/.
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications and Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. “AI Guidelines for Business Ver1.01.” Government of Japan, December 25, 2024. https://www.soumu.go.jp.
Muhammad Muslim, Muhammad Firkan, and Indi Izza Afdania. “Legal Construction of Criminal Prosecution Against Perpetrators of Rape in the Metaverse: Konstruksi Hukum Pemidanaan Terhadap Pelaku Pemerkosaan Di Metaverse.” Peradaban Hukum Nusantara 1, no. 1 (August 2024): 60–74. https://doi.org/10.62193/3aga8d22.
Pushkarna, Mahima, Andrew Zaldivar, and Oddur Kjartansson. Data Cards: Purposeful and Transparent Dataset Documentation for Responsible AI. Canada, United States, United Kingdom: Google Research, 2021. https://ai.google/responsible-ai/data-cards.
Quang Huy, Pham, and Vu Kien Phuc. “Insight into How Legal and Ethical Considerations of Artificial Intelligence Enhance the Effectiveness of Cyber Forensic Accounting.” Journal of Global Information Technology Management 28, no. 2 (April 2025): 136–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2025.2480972.
Raji, Inioluwa Deborah, Andrew Smart, Rebecca N. White, Margaret Mitchell, Timnit Gebru, Ben Hutchinson, Jamila Smith-Loud, Daniel Theron, and Parker Barnes. “Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditing.” arXiv Preprint arXiv:2001.00973, ahead of print, 2020. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2001.00973.
Raymond, Nate. “US Judicial Panel Advances Proposal to Regulate AI-Generated Evidence.” Reuters, May 3, 2025. https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judicial-panel-advances-proposal-regulate-ai-generated-evidence-2025-05-03/.
Richmond, Karen McGregor, Satya M. Muddamsetty, Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen, Henrik Palmer Olsen, and Thomas B. Moeslund. “Explainable AI and Law: An Evidential Survey.” Digital Society 3, no. 1 (December 2023): 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-023-00081-z.
Roberts, Paul. “Expert Evidence.” In Roberts & Zuckerman’s Criminal Evidence, edited by Paul Roberts and Adrian Zuckerman, 527–80. Oxford University Press, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198824480.003.0011.
Sandoval, Maria-Paz, Maria de Almeida Vau, John Solaas, and Luano Rodrigues. “Threat of Deepfakes to the Criminal Justice System: A Systematic Review.” Crime Science 13, no. 1 (November 2024): 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-024-00239-1.
Schwab, Klaus, and Saadia Zahidi. The Global Competitiveness Report: How Countries Are Performing on the Road to Recovery (Special Edition 2020). Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum, 2020. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020.
Soekanto, Soerjono, and Sri Mamudji. Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Edisi 1 Cetakan ke-12 (2010 dulu, cet. Ulang 2015). Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada, 2015.
Surden, Harry. “Artificial Intelligence and Law: An Overview.” Georgia State University Law Review 35, no. 4 (June 2019). https://doi.org/Avaible%20at:%20https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/gsulr/vol35/iss4/8%3Futm_source=readingroom.law.gsu.edu%252Fgsulr%252Fvol35%252Fiss4%252F8&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages.
Tejomurti, Kukuh, Sukarmi Sukarmi, Budi Santoso, and Hanif Nur Widhiyanti. “Big Data Analytics Algorithms for Dynamic Pricing: The Legal Analysis of the Indonesia Competitions Law Readiness in Digital Era.” Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan 12, no. 1 (April 2024): 68–90. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v12i1.1303.
U.S. Department of Justice. Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Justice: Final Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 2024.
Vanoverbeke, Dimitri. “Protecting the Script of the Japanese Criminal Justice System.” Law & Social Inquiry 47, no. 2 (May 2022): 734–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2022.5.
Watanabe, Chihara. “Science at the Bar in Japan.” Ritsumeikan Law Review 34 (2017): 1–15. https://doi.org/avaible%20at:%20https://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/cg/law/lex/rlr34.html.
Wright, James. “The Development of AI Ethics in Japan: Ethics-Washing Society 5.0?” East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal 18, no. 2 (April 2024): 117–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2023.2275987.
Yoesuf, Juliani Paramitha, Fery Ramadhansyah, Sinta Elviyanti, and Ade Salamah. “Strengthening The Implementation of E-Court-Based Judiciary As A Legal Protection In The Implementation of E-Litigation-Based Trials.” Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan 12, no. 2 (July 2023): 293–318. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.12.2.2023.293-318.
Zumbansen, Peer. “Comparative Law’s Coming of Age? Twenty Years after Critical Comparisons.” German Law Journal 6, no. 7 (July 2005): 1073–84. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200014139.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2026 Hendri Antoro, Danrivanto Budhijanto, Somawijaya
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The authors hold the copyright. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. How ever the author should affirming that the article is their original work should accompany the article via online submission form. Authors are permitted to share a Preprint of their article anywhere at any time. Link Declaration of originality (PDF)
