Saving the Law from the “Courts” of Digital Society and Algorithmic Logic Oleh -By Ja’far Shodiq, M Najib

The slogan “No Viral No Justice” is often used to legitimize the judgment of someone suspected of committing a crime, without going through legal procedures. This method is considered effective and efficient by justice seekers in finding justice amidst the chaos of law enforcement, which has led to a loss of trust in law enforcement.

Legal incidents have proven that the slogan “No Viral No Justice” effectively uncovers the truth through digital media, often hidden by law enforcement agencies. Seeking justice through the slogan “No Viral No Justice” is also highly efficient, as it requires little expense, effort, or time. It simply needs to be made viral on social media and spiced up with opinion manipulation to garner widespread interest and create an algorithmic network. For this reason, the slogan “No Viral No Justice” is highly sought after by justice seekers.

The pursuit of justice through the slogan “No Viral No Justice” sometimes yields positive results. However, this does not necessarily legitimize the pursuit of justice outside of existing law enforcement agencies. In a state governed by the rule of law, legal cases must be resolved through legal institutions to ensure that one person’s rights are not violated by others.

Leaving judgment to the public and algorithmic logic through the slogan “No Viral, No Justice” has the potential to violate an individual’s right to be presumed innocent until a legal investigation by law enforcement agencies (the presumption of innocence). This clearly contradicts the principle of the rule of law, “Due process of law.” This principle guarantees every individual a fair, impartial trial, and one that complies with established procedures.

The conflict with the principle of due process of law begins when the pursuit of justice is quantified. The virality of a legal case is perceived as majority support, which is then used as justification for legitimacy. There is no guarantee that the people involved in the majority vote are not basing their support solely on emotion, rather than logical argument.

Law enforcement based on public emotion is unacceptable. The law must be enforced legally and rationally. This legal-rational nature implies: first, the law must be enforced by authorized law enforcement agencies so that their decisions have the force of law and guarantee citizens’ rights proportionally. Second, legal arguments must be rational, in accordance with statutory regulations and legal facts on the ground.

In conclusion, the slogan “No Viral No Justice” cannot be used as a premature means to obtain justice. Many law enforcement officers still enforce the law according to procedure and as it should be. The slogan “No Viral No Justice” is sufficient as a spirit to monitor how law and power are exercised.