Law No 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (the “PDP Law”) constitutes the primary legal framework for privacy and personal data protection in Indonesia. The PDP Law is enacted as an implementation of the constitutional right to privacy (as elaborated in its General Elucidation) pursuant to Article 28G(1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.
In Indonesia, personal data is defined as data regarding individuals (referred to as data subjects) who are identified or can be identified separately or in combination with other information, either directly or indirectly, through an electronic or non-electronic system.
Personal data is classified into two categories:
The PDP Law establishes key principles and lawful bases for personal data processing, personal data categorisation, the processing requirements for children and persons with disabilities, data subjects rights, the scope of personal data processing, and role-based compliance obligations (ie, personal data controllers, personal data processors, and joint controllers). In addition, the PDP Law regulates the appointment of a Data Protection Officer (DPO), requirements for personal data transfer (both domestically and cross borders), administrative sanctions for non-compliance, and criminal sanctions in the event of violation. The PDP Law also addresses international co-operation in the field of personal data protection, public participation, and mechanisms for dispute resolution.
The PDP Law is expected to be supplemented by implementing regulations in the form of a government regulation. While the PDP Law governs the general framework of personal data protection in Indonesia, it is also subject to other existing and sector-specific laws and regulations. These include, among others:
These sectoral regulations supplement or specify personal data protection rules, provided they do not conflict with the PDP Law.
The PDP Law has extraterritorial reach, applying to individuals or corporations, public bodies, or international organisations that conduct legal acts as regulated under the PDP Law, whether:
The PDP Law does not apply to the processing of personal data by individuals for purely personal or household purposes.
General Principles of Personal Data Processing
In Indonesia, the processing of personal data encompasses the entire life cycle of personal data, from collection, analysis, storage, rectification, display, announcement, transfer, disclosure, deletion, and destruction of personal data. Such personal data processing must follow these principles:
Data Subject Rights
Under the PDP Law, the data subjects’ rights are recognised, including:
The PDP Law further provides a response mechanism for the exercise of data subject rights. Where a personal data controller receives a request for the exercise of the rights referred to in items (iv) to (vii) above, the controller is required to fulfil such request within 3 × 24 hours (ie, within 72 hours).
Role-Based Compliance Obligations under the PDP Law
The main compliance of each organisation depends on its role. The PDP Law recognises several distinct roles, each subject to specific responsibilities, liabilities, and regulatory obligations, namely the personal data controller, personal data processor, and joint controller.
The PDP Law does not set out separate processing regimes for general personal data and specific personal data. However, the processing of specific personal data may trigger additional regulatory obligations. Under PDP Law, such processing may: (i) serve as an indicator of “high-risk processing”, thereby requiring the conduct of a DPIA or risk assessment; or (ii) serve as one of the indicators for the mandatory appointment of a DPO.
Processing of Children and Persons with Disabilities
The PDP Law further provides that the processing of children’s personal data and the personal data of persons with disabilities must be carried out in a specific manner and subject to additional requirements. In the case of children, processing requires parental consent and/or legal guardians in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. For persons with disabilities, processing must be conducted using appropriate communication methods as regulated under applicable laws, and requires consent from the individual concerned and/or their legal guardian.
In addition, the processing of children’s (defined as individuals who use or access the products, services, and features and are under 18 years of age) personal data through electronic systems is subject to PP TUNAS (see 1.1 Overview of Data and Privacy-Related Laws). PP TUNAS applies to all electronic system operators (ESOs), both public and private, whose products, services, or features are intended for use by children or are likely to be accessed by them. As an implementing regulation of the EIT Law, PP TUNAS introduces a range of obligations and prohibitions relating to children’s privacy and personal data protection, including requirements on parental consent and notification, high-privacy settings by default, the conduct of DPIAs, and the appointment of a DPO, as well as prohibitions on profiling and precise geolocation tracking by default, and manipulative practices (any methods, techniques, or non-transparent practices that can encourage children to overshare data, disable privacy settings, or engage in harmful behaviour), are strictly forbidden.
In principle, the PDP Law does not prohibit the processing of personal data or anonymise data for research and development purposes, provided that such processing complies with the PDP Law and any applicable sector-specific regulations (for example, healthcare regulations).
Although the PDP Law does not currently contain specific provisions governing research and development activities, it recognises that certain data subject rights may be exempted for public interest purposes, including for statistical purposes and scientific research.
Where personal data is processed for the statistical activities and scientific research, the exempted rights are (i) the right to withdraw consent; (ii) the right to object to automated decision-making and profiling; (iii) the right to restrict processing; (iv) the right to data portability; and (v) the right to request the termination of processing, deletion, and/or destruction of personal data.
Accordingly, while the PDP Law does not provide a dedicated research and development regime, it allows limited restrictions on certain data subject rights, without relieving compliance with the core principles and obligations under the PDP Law.
Indonesia’s legal framework on artificial intelligence (AI) is still in an emerging stage, and there is currently no comprehensive statute governing the development or use of AI. Regulatory oversight is fragmented and primarily derived from existing, sector-specific laws and policy instruments issued and supervised by various authorities. These include, among others, the MOCD, which issued Circular Letter No 9 of 2023 on AI Ethics, as well as sectoral guidance from other regulators, such as the OJK, which introduced the OJK and Fintech Associations AI Code of Ethics. The personal data protection-related aspects under these instruments are relatively general in nature. They require that any processing of personal data involving automated decision-making and AI systems comply with the PDP Law and other applicable regulations.
The PDP Law does not contain AI-specific provisions. Nevertheless, the use of AI systems or models involving the processing of personal data is subject to the general requirements under the PDP Law. In particular, such processing may be classified as high-risk processing, as the use of new or emerging technologies is expressly recognised as one of the indicators of high-risk processing under the PDP Law framework and further triggers the requirement to conduct a DPIA.
In addition, the PDP Law grants data subjects specific rights in relation to automated decision-making. Where a data subject objects to a decision made solely through automated processing, which may include decisions generated automatically through AI, the data subject may request that the decision be reviewed or re-made with human involvement, in accordance with the PDP Law.
In the event of a data breach or personal data protection failure, the personal data controller must provide a written notification no later than 3 x 24 hours (ie, within 72 hours) to the affected personal data subject and to the personal data protection authority (“PDP Authority”). In certain cases, where the personal data protection failure interferes with public services and/or has a significant impact on the public interest, the personal data controller must notify the public of such personal data protection failure.
The written notification shall at least contain the following:
The PDP Law stipulates that the data privacy litigation or dispute resolution is conducted through court, arbitration, or other alternative dispute resolution bodies.
In practice, a data breach involving ESOs must also be notified to the MOCD within 72 hours from the discovery of the personal data protection incident. The MOCD provides a specific reporting form for data breach/incident, which must be completed by the ESOs and submitted together with relevant supporting documents evidencing the occurrence of the personal data protection breach.
With respect to investigations conducted by the MOCD, the legal basis for such investigative powers is derived from the EIT Law and MOCD Reg 20/2016. Under the EIT Law, the competent authorities, specifically investigators from the MOCD, the Indonesian National Police and certain authorised civil servant investigators, are granted the authority to examine the following:
Under MOCD Reg 20/2016, the MOCD is authorised to trace and follow up on reports of personal data protection failures and, for supervisory purposes, may request data and information from ESOs in connection with personal data protection, either periodically or at any time as deemed necessary.
PDP Authority
The PDP Law mandates an independent PDP Authority appointed by the President. The PDP Authority has the power to:
As of the date of this guide, the President has yet to appoint the PDP Authority to assume the roles above. Hence, it is also important to identify other authorities who might have mandates based on sectoral regulations.
Sectoral Regulators
Subject to the applicable sectoral laws and regulations, there are sectoral regulators who might have mandates to supervise the personal data processing, as outlined below.
MOCD
The MOCD derives its authority in personal data protection from the EIT Law and GR 71/2019 and currently serves as the primary supervisory authority for ESOs. Its mandate includes issuing data protection-related regulations for electronic systems, overseeing compliance, conducting investigations and administrative enforcement for violations, and co-ordinating with law enforcement agencies and other relevant sectoral authorities.
OJK
The OJK holds specialised supervisory authority over personal data protection within the financial services sector, covering banks and other financial institutions, financial technology and digital payment providers, capital markets and securities companies, as well as insurance, pension funds, and other non-bank financial service institutions. The OJK conducts regular co-ordination with the MOCD regarding overlapping jurisdictions, particularly for fintech and digital financial services utilising electronic systems.
National Cyber and Crypto Agency (Badan Siber dan Sandi Negara, BSSN)
The BSSN is the primary technical authority for cybersecurity aspects of personal data protection in Indonesia, particularly in cases involving cyber incidents, national vital infrastructure, or cross-border cyber threats. Under BSSN Regulation No 1 of 2024 on Cyber Incident Management (“BSSN Reg 1/2024”), ESOs, especially those operating vital information infrastructure, must report cyber incidents to the National Cyber Incident Response Team (Nat-CSIRT) within 24 hours. The BSSN is empowered to conduct technical investigations and digital forensics, identify system vulnerabilities, provide incident containment and recovery assistance, and lead the response to major cyber incidents affecting the security of personal data.
Law enforcement
Law enforcement agencies, including the Indonesian National Police and Attorney General’s Office, possess authority in handling criminal cases related to personal data protection based on (i) criminal sanctions in the PDP Law and (ii) cyber-crimes and criminal sanctions under the EIT Law. Criminal law enforcement is conducted in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), special procedures in the EIT Law for cyber crimes, and digital evidence handling protocols.
Law enforcement agencies co-ordinate with the MOCD, the OJK, and the BSSN regarding (i) information exchange for investigation purposes; (ii) technical assistance in digital forensic analysis; (iii) cross-jurisdictional case co-ordination; and (iv) prevention of overlapping legal processes.
Cross-Border Co-Ordination
Pursuant to the cross-border co-ordination, the PDP Law grants the authorities, including the PDP Authority, the power to conduct international co-operation in personal data protection, including: (i) information exchange with foreign data protection authorities; (ii) mutual legal assistance in investigations; (iii) harmonisation of data protection standards; and (iv) joint capacity development.
The PDP Authority possesses comprehensive investigative powers, including the ability to conduct examinations, request documentation, interview relevant parties, and co-ordinate with other authorities. The PDP Authority may initiate investigations based on data breach notifications, public complaints, audits, or referrals from other government agencies.
Administrative Sanctions
The PDP Law grants the PDP Authority the power to impose administrative sanctions, including written warnings, temporary suspension of personal data processing activities, permanent suspension of processing operations, deletion of personal data, and imposes administrative fines. The PDP Law imposes fines of up to 2% of the annual revenue of the personal data controller or personal data processor in the preceding financial year.
However, as of the date of this guide, the detailed procedures for imposing administrative sanctions, including assessment criteria, severity violations, penalty calculation guidelines, and appeal mechanisms, have not been fully elaborated through implementing regulations. The PDP Law provides the statutory foundation, but operational procedures remain under development by the competent authorities.
Criminal Sanctions
The PDP Law also regulates the criminal sanctions, as follows:
Further, Law No 1 of 2026 on Criminal Sentencing Adjustment introduced a category-based fine system that substantially reduced the monetary penalties. Unlawful collection, disclosure, and use of personal data are now subject to fines capped at IDR200 million, while the forgery of personal data is subject to fines capped at IDR500 million, without any reduction in the applicable prison terms.
Where these offences are committed by or for a corporation, criminal liability may be imposed on both the company and the individuals involved, and corporate fines may be increased by up to ten times the statutory maximum fines applicable to individuals.
The PDP Law came into effect in October 2024, following the end of the two-year statutory grace period. However, administrative enforcement has not yet been fully implemented, as the PDP Authority mandated by the PDP Law has not been established. As a result, although the administrative sanctions framework under the PDP Law is formally in force, no formal PDP Authority-led administrative penalties have yet been issued.
Unlike administrative sanctions, criminal sanction enforcement under the PDP Law has been active and there are several court decisions in relation to criminal sanctions in the PDP Law. The first court decision is Karanganyar District Court Decision No 5/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Krg dated 16 March 2023, in which the perpetrator was found guilty of data falsification and imprisoned for four years, and also ordered to pay an IDR1 billion fine.
The number of privacy-related proceedings in Indonesian courts remains relatively low, with the legal framework still developing following the enactment of the PDP Law.
Claimant Types and Legal Standing Issues
The primary category of claimants in privacy-related disputes consists of individual data subjects who have suffered direct harm from personal data processing violations. These individuals typically include affected customers or users following data breaches, unauthorised disclosure incidents, or other forms of personal data protection failure.
The second category of claimants are consumer groups or public interest litigants. However, in practice, significant legal standing challenges have emerged regarding collective or representative actions brought by consumer groups or public interest organisations. The legal standing of such entities to represent broader classes of affected individuals remains debatable under Indonesian procedural law, with courts demonstrating inconsistent approaches to these claims.
Available Remedies Under PDP Law
The PDP Law provides a framework of remedies for data subjects who suffer harm from personal data protection violations, including the right to claim compensation. The mechanism to claim compensation is expected to be further elaborated in the implementing regulation of the PDP Law.
In addition to compensation, the PDP Law allows courts to order injunctive and corrective measures, including requiring the suspension of unlawful data processing, the implementation of appropriate security safeguards, and the correction of inaccurate personal data.
The ongoing enforcement cases have mainly relied on criminal sanctions under the PDP Law and the EIT Law, particularly in cases involving unlawful access, disclosure, or forgery of personal data.
Aside from the criminal cases, there are several constitutional court decisions in Indonesia related to the PDP Law. The landmark decision on the PDP Law is Constitutional Court Decision No 151/PUU-XXII/2024 dated 30 July 2025, which clarifies the interpretation of the fulfilment of criteria requiring a data protection controller or data protection processor to appoint a DPO.
Indonesia allows collective redress through class actions under Supreme Court Regulation No 1 of 2002 on Class Action Procedure. This mechanism permits one or more plaintiffs to represent a larger group with common facts and legal issues. In principle, personal data protection violations may be pursued through this mechanism.
Indonesia does not currently have a single, comprehensive legal framework specifically governing the protection and processing of non-personal data. Instead, the regulation of non-personal data is primarily fragmented into several sectoral laws.
By way of example, in the electronic ecosystem, the relevant regulations include (among others) GR 71/2019, Government Regulation No 80 of 2019 on Electronic Commerce, MOCD Regulation No 5 of 2020 as amended by Minister of Communication and Informatics Regulation No 10 of 2021 on Private Electronic System Providers (“MOCD Reg 5/2020”), and applicable cybersecurity regulations. In the financial sector, among others, OJK Regulation No 44 of 2024 on Bank Secrecy, OJK Regulation No 22 of 2023 on Consumer and Public Protection in the Financial Services Sector and BI Regulation No 3 of 2023 on BI Consumer Protection also apply. There are also archival and record-keeping laws, including Law No 8 of 1997 on Company Documents (“Company Documents Law”) and Law No 43 of 2009 on Archives.
In general, these regimes regulate data management throughout its life cycle without distinguishing between personal and non-personal data, including data governance and use, security and confidentiality, sector-specific handling requirements, archiving and retention periods, data transfers, and incident or breach response obligations, including reporting timelines and notifications to relevant sectoral authorities. Where certain regulations make reference to personal data, their interaction with the PDP Law is addressed in 3.2 Interaction of Data Regulation and Data Protection.
The interaction between sectoral regulations and the PDP Law generally takes two forms. First, certain sector-specific regulations expressly refer to the PDP Law for personal data protection compliance. Second, other regulations impose additional, supplementary, or more specific personal data processing requirements in respect of particular categories of data or regulated activities. For example, while the PDP Law does not expressly regulate data retention periods, such requirements may be addressed under applicable sectoral regulations (eg, under the Company Documents Law, records, bookkeeping evidence, and supporting financial administrative data must be retained for a period of ten years, calculated from the end of the relevant company’s financial year).
In essence, sector-specific data handling rules are applicable in parallel with the PDP Law, provided they do not conflict with its provisions. Where data qualifies as personal data, the PDP Law operates as the primary legal framework, while sectoral regulations typically supplement the PDP Law by regulating sector-specific processing scenarios or imposing heightened obligations.
The applicable rights and obligations largely depend on the relevant sector and regulatory context. In practice, contractual arrangements also play a critical role in allocating rights, obligations, and liability.
Organisations should therefore ensure that their contracts clearly define the agreed arrangements, including, among others, roles and responsibilities of each party in relation to the data and its processing, permitted uses or purposes, and applicable technical and organisational measures, while also ensuring the inclusion of provisions addressing compliance with any applicable sector-specific regulatory requirements.
In relation to non-personal data, enforcement authority depends on the nature of the data and the relevant sector. Competent authorities include, among others, the MOCD for ESOs, the OJK for the financial services sector, and the BSSN for cybersecurity matters.
Co-ordination among regulators typically arises in practice where incidents affect both non-personal and personal data. In such cases, sectoral regulators may co-ordinate with the personal data protection authority under the PDP Law, as well as with other relevant government bodies, depending on the affected sector.
A notable recent trend is the increasing frequency and sophistication of cybersecurity incidents in various sectors, which require more active inter-agency co-ordination, particularly where an incident affects both personal and non-personal data and simultaneously implicates data protection, system security, and sector-specific compliance obligations.
Indonesia does not currently have a specific regulation that expressly governs the use of cookies, software development kits (SDKs), or other online tracking technologies.
However, to the extent that such technologies involve the processing of personal data, their use is subject to the general principles and requirements under the PDP Law and the EIT Law, including to provide clear information and transparency to data subjects regarding the collection and use of their personal data in such cookies.
The PDP Law does not specifically regulate personalised or targeted advertising activities. However, where such activities involve the processing of personal data or profiling activities, they are subject to the general principles and requirements under the PDP Law.
Given the absence of specific provisions governing personalised advertising or marketing, the applicable marketing requirements must be assessed on a sectoral basis. For instance, in the financial services sector, OJK Reg 22/2023 prohibits financial services business actors from offering products and/or services to prospective consumers and/or consumers through personal communication channels without the consent of prospective consumers and/consumers.
In the electronic ecosystem, particularly under PP TUNAS, ESOs that are potentially directed at or intended for children are prohibited from conducting profiling by default, by any means or methods, including for product or service offerings or other purposes. Where profiling is to be carried out, it must be justified through a risk assessment or demonstrated to be essential for the provision of the service.
There are currently no employment-specific personal data protection laws. The processing of employees’ personal data is therefore subject to the PDP Law and its implementing regulations.
Employee-related processing activities, including employee monitoring, are not specifically prohibited, provided that they are conducted in accordance with the PDP Law, and are typically grounded in contractual arrangements between the employer and the employee.
In current practice, employers in Indonesia commonly rely on employment agreements as the primary lawful basis for processing employee personal data, without prejudice to the availability of other lawful basis under the PDP Law for specific employee-related data processing activities.
The PDP Law regulates personal data protection requirements in the context of corporate actions, including mergers, acquisitions, spin-offs, and dissolutions. Under the PDP Law, a personal data controller in the form of a legal entity that undergoes a merger, acquisition, spin-off, and/or dissolution is required to notify personal data subjects of the personal data transfer both prior to and after the completion of such corporate action.
In the event that a personal data controller in the form of a legal entity is dissolved or liquidated, the storage, transfer, deletion, or destruction of personal data must be carried out in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and such actions must be notified to the relevant personal data subjects.
Further procedural details are expected to be regulated under the forthcoming government regulation implementing the PDP Law.
In practice, notifications to data subjects may be delivered through any medium that is reasonably accessible to them. For example, in the context of an acquisition where Indonesian corporate law requires pre- and post-acquisition announcements to be published in national newspapers, PDP-related notifications may be incorporated into such mandatory corporate announcements, provided that it is made clear that the announcement is also addressed to data subjects, and not solely to creditors.
Accordingly, each corporate action must be assessed on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the role of the personal data controller remains unchanged, is transferred to another entity, or is otherwise impacted.
Under the PDP Law, a cross-border transfer of personal data occurs where a personal data controller or personal data processor makes personal data available or provides access to another party located outside the jurisdiction of Indonesia, whether by transmission, remote access, hosting, or any other technical means. This includes cloud hosting, cross-border access to databases, and sharing of data with overseas affiliates or vendors.
Based on PDP Law, cross-border transfers of personal data are permitted only if one of the following safeguards is satisfied:
Cross-border transfers of non-personal electronic data are governed by GR 71/2019, which allows private ESOs to host, process, store electronic systems and electronic data (including non-personal data) outside the territory of Indonesia, except for the financial sector, which is subject to sectoral regulations.
The PDP Law does not stipulate a prior approval requirement by PDP Authority for international personal data transfers. However, the PDP Law grants the PDP Authority specific powers to conduct assessments of cross-border data transfer requirements for fulfillment.
In relation to the electronic system, private ESOs are obligated to co-ordinate with MOCD in relation to international transfers.
The regulatory requirements in relation to international transfers may be subject to sectoral laws, among others:
In general, the PDP Law does not require data localisation. Remote access from abroad is generally treated as a cross-border data transfer and is therefore subject to the PDP Law transfer safeguards.
The following are some sectors in which data localisation is mandatory or required:
Although the PDP Law does not contain blocking provisions against foreign courts, MOCD Reg 5/2020 authorises the government to implement access blocking of electronic systems. Under these regulations, MOCD can block access to a private ESO if:
The more detailed requirements on international data transfer are expected to be regulated under the upcoming Government Regulation regarding the implementation of PDP Law, including formal criteria for assessing foreign data protection regulation, standards for data transfer agreements, binding corporate rules, and requirements for transfer impact assessments.
Sampoerna Strategic Square
South Tower
Level 16
Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 45-46
Jakarta 12930
Indonesia
+62-811-978-2024
office@altaadvocates.com www.altaadvocates.com
Indonesia’s Evolving Data Protection Framework: Key Developments in AI, Cyber Resilience and Child Protection
PDP Law in a nutshell
Law No 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (the “PDP Law”) serves as the overarching law on personal data protection in Indonesia. In addition to the PDP Law, the implementation of personal data protection is subject to the following laws and regulations:
The PDP Law has extraterritorial effect, meaning that overseas organisations, including individuals, public entities, and international organisations, can be prosecuted in Indonesia for violating the law, particularly for non-compliance in processing personal data of Indonesian citizens, whether onshore or offshore. The Indonesian government has been working on the Draft Implementing Regulation for Law No 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (“Draft GR PDP”), which is intended to provide further guidance on the law’s implementation and enforcement. However, as of early 2026, there is no clear timeline for its finalisation. Based on the latest available public statement from the Ministry of Communications and Digital Affairs (MOCD) in October 2025, the Draft GR PDP has completed its harmonisation process, and has been passed to the State Secretary for approval by the President.
Furthermore, an amendment to the current PDP Law is currently included in the Annual Priority National Legislation Programme (which is prepared jointly by the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Board, and the President) for 2026. The amendment was registered on 23 September 2025 and is only at the planning stage.
Some of the notable provisions under the PDP Law are outlined below.
Types of personal data
The PDP Law defines “personal data” as “any data related to an individual (natural person), whether identified or capable of being identified independently or in combination with other information, whether directly or indirectly, through the use of an electronic system and/or non-electronic means”. The individual is referred to as a “data subject”.
The PDP Law further categorises personal data as general personal data (name, gender, nationality, religion, marital status, or personal data that together can identify a person) and specific personal data (data on health, biometric or genetic, and criminal records; data on children; financial data; and/or other data in accordance with the laws and regulations). There is no particular differentiation in treatment of the processing of general or specific personal data. However, the processing of specific personal data would trigger additional obligations, such as the need to perform a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) and appoint a Data Protection Officer (DPO).
Lawful basis for processing of personal data
The PDP Law acknowledges several legal bases for personal data processing: (i) consent; (ii) contractual necessity; (iii) compliance with a data controller’s legal obligations; (iv) protection of the vital interests of the data subject; (v) public interest, for the provision of public services or for the exercise of lawful authority; and (vi) legitimate interest. We observe that the above legal bases are very similar to the concept adopted by the EU GDPR.
Cross-border data transfer
The PDP Law introduces layered requirements to allow data controllers to transfer personal data outside Indonesian territory, namely:
Points (i) to (iii) above must be assessed and implemented in sequence. To date there is no indication that an official approved list of countries that meet the Adequacy of Protection requirements will be published.
Data Protection Authority (DPA)
The PDP Law mandates the formation of a DPA that is tasked to act as regulator, supervisor, and executor in data protection matters by the President, which is yet to be formed. In the meantime, pursuant to MOCD Regulation 1/2025 on Organisation and Work Procedures, matters concerning personal data protection are currently under the authority of Directorate General of Digital Space Supervision at the MOCD (DG). The DG is tasked with formulating and implementing policies related to digital space supervision and personal data protection. Based on statements made by the current Minister in public announcements, the DPA is expected to be established in the near future.
DPO
The PDP Law requires a data controller or data processor to appoint a DPO in situations where: (i) it processes personal data for public interest; (ii) the data controller’s core activities have such a nature, scope, and/or purpose that require regular and systematic monitoring of personal data on a large scale; and (iii) the data controller’s core activities involve large-scale processing of specific/sensitive or criminal-related personal data.
The Indonesian Constitutional Court, through Decision No 151/PUU-XXII/2024 dated 30 July 2025, held that this cumulative reading was unconstitutional. The word “and” the PDP Law must instead be read as “and/or,” meaning that fulfilling any one of these conditions is sufficient to trigger the obligation to appoint a DPO. Thus, data controllers and data processors should reassess their obligations under the PDP Law to appoint a DPO.
Development on artificial intelligence (AI)
AI is increasingly being adopted across multiple sectors in Indonesia, including by government institutions in their daily operations. Recognising the growing demand for AI technologies, the government has indicated its support for AI development and is planning to accommodate its use through forthcoming regulations and infrastructure initiatives.
While Indonesia has yet to introduce binding regulations governing the use of AI, MOCD issued Circular Letter No 9 of 2023 on Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (“CL 9”). As of early 2026, CL 9 remains the only general regulatory guidance addressing the use of AI by business undertakings.
In summary, CL 9 contains the following salient items:
Additionally, the Financial Services Authority (Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, or OJK) has issued a Code of Ethics for Responsible and Trustworthy AI in the Financial Technology Industry, which applies to financial technology providers. The Code also stipulates principles of AI utilisation in the financial services industry, which includes: beneficial, fair and accountable, transparent and explicable, and robust and secure principles. In the banking sector, the OJK has issued Artificial Intelligence Governance for Indonesian Banking, which provides guidance for Indonesian banks on the responsible development and deployment of AI and reiterates the application of these principles in banking activities.
In response to the increasing demand for AI-related regulations and infrastructures, the MOCD recently issued its Whitepaper Roadmap for AI (“AI Roadmap”), which includes the MOCD’s intention to support the development of AI and ways to optimise AI as part of Indonesia’s digital ecosystem development. The AI Roadmap includes the MOCD’s five-year programmes and goals related to the development of AI, including the intention to conduct research on AI, create regulations and policies regarding the use of AI, building AI infrastructures, and conducting harmonisation and standardisation on the interoperability of AI systems used in ministries and institutions. The AI Roadmap also addresses personal data protection aspects in the development, uses, and operation of AI.
Update on cyber resilience
Pursuant to the Indonesian Cyber Security Landscape published by the National Cyber and Crypto Agency in 2024, there were 56,128,160 data exposures that affected 461 stakeholders in Indonesia. As of August 2025, the National Cyber and Crypto Agency (BSSN) recorded a total of 3.64 billion cyber-attacks. Recurring data breaches in Indonesia highlight vulnerabilities in the country’s cybersecurity policies and systems, along with insufficient supervision and enforcement against perpetrators.
The current legal framework requires reporting data breaches to the MOCD and notifying data subjects, while cybersecurity incidents without a data breach must be reported to regulators and law enforcement. Below are the regulatory regimes for data breach and cybersecurity incident notification:
The BSSN has issued BSSN Regulation No 1 of 2024 on Cyber Incident Management (“BSSN Reg. 1/2024”) in an effort to combat the high number of cyber incidents, establishing Cyber Incident Response Teams (CIRTs) at a national, sectoral, and organisational level. CIRTs are expected to manage cyber incidents through the following steps:
The membership of the national CIRT consists of representatives from:
Ministries and institutions are also required to create their own sectoral CIRT, while stare-run institutions owning and/or operating IIV and ESOs other than state-run institutions owning and/or operating IIV are required to form an organisational CIRT.
The government is also preparing the Draft Regulation for Cyber Security and Resilience (“Cybersecurity Bill”), which is intended to strengthen national cybersecurity protection. This Bill will regulate information infrastructure providers, critical information infrastructure, and digital product/service providers to implement stricter cybersecurity standards by combining upstream (requirements), midstream (monitoring, evaluation, and assessment/reporting), and downstream (sanctions) approaches.
Based on the publicly available draft, the key points in the Cybersecurity Bill include the following:
The Cybersecurity Bill is expected to be the legal basis for maintaining Indonesia’s cybersecurity, sovereignty, and resilience amidst escalating global threats, complementing the existing EIT Law. On the House of Representatives’ website, the Bill is only registered in the Medium-Term Annual Priority National Legislation Programme (2025-2029), and was last updated in November 2024. However, based on news articles in August 2025, the Bill is currently at the harmonisation stage, where the draft is deliberated among various ministries/agencies and relevant stakeholders.
Likely implementation of the Draft GR PDP
As noted above, the Indonesian government has been preparing the Draft GR PDP for some time. While it is expected to provide further guidance on the implementation of the PDP Law, the regulation has yet to be issued. In addition, the Draft GR PDP contemplates the conferral of certain regulatory powers on the DPA, which has not yet been established.
Some notable provisions under the Draft GR PDP (latest publicly available draft as of August 2023) are outlined below.
Requirements for reliance on lawful bases
The Draft GR PDP provides further guidance or requirements on reliance upon lawful bases of processing, including:
Practical challenges arising from the existence of various lawful bases for data processing include the need for data controllers to appropriately identify the correct lawful basis for each processing activity. Given that the PDP Law lacks sufficient guidance, data controllers must exercise caution when identifying the purpose of data processing and selecting the appropriate lawful basis. This task requires careful assessment to ensure compliance with the law and to avoid potential risks associated with unlawful data processing. Therefore, it is advisable for data controllers to engage in continuous consultation with authorities or legal consultants to ensure proper understanding and implementation of the law, as well as to address any ambiguities or uncertainties related to the lawful bases for personal data processing.
AI technology providers and users must consider the use of personal data for AI learning, output creation, and feedback. The processing of personal data using AI must: (i) adhere to data protection principles under the PDP Law; (ii) rely on an appropriate lawful basis for processing; and (iii) implement safeguards throughout the processing stages. For instance, users of generative AI platforms must ensure they have secured the necessary lawful basis, such as obtaining consent from individuals before processing their personal data on AI platforms.
Cross-border data transfer
As stated above, the PDP Law provides that a data controller may transfer personal data offshore should they fulfil the layered requirements of Adequacy of Protection, Appropriate Safeguards, or consent of the data subjects. Data controllers are expected to be fully responsible for implementing appropriate security measures in the processing of data transfer.
The Draft GR PDP determines the Adequacy of Protection for personal data transfers by assessing the recipient country’s circumstances, including the existence of (i) personal data protection laws; (ii) a supervisory authority; and (iii) international commitments or obligations under legally binding conventions or resulting from participation in multilateral systems. The Data Protection Authority will compile the list of approved countries.
When using Appropriate Safeguards for transferring personal data abroad, the Draft GR PDP allows safeguards such as (i) agreements between the sender’s and recipient’s countries; (ii) standard contractual clauses; (iii) binding company regulations for a group; or (iv) other recognised instruments. Data controllers and processors must also meet additional obligations, such as recording the transfer cycle, mapping its implications, and ensuring that the transferred data is sufficient, relevant, and limited to the transfer’s purpose.
In July 2025, the MOCD issued a press release on data transfer clauses in a Joint Statement on Framework for United States–Indonesia Agreement on Reciprocal Trade with the United States issued by the White House on 22 July 2025 (“Joint Statement”) with the intention to remove the barrier in digital information trade. The Joint Statement stipulates that Indonesia will provide certainty regarding the ability to transfer personal data out of its territory to the United States. This statement raised concerns over the potential removal of barriers to cross-border personal data transfers, as this could undermine the level of personal data protection and appear inconsistent with the layered cross-border transfer requirements under the PDP Law. However, the MOCD assured that the Joint Statement is not a form of free transfer of personal data and that transfers will still be conducted based on Adequacy of Protection under Indonesian law. There is currently no further clarification on the implementation of such barrier removal for data transfers with the USA.
Online Child Protection Government Regulation
Government Regulation No 17 of 2025 on the Governance of Child Protection in the Operation of Electronic Systems focuses on mitigating the negative impacts of the digital space for children (“GR 17/2025”). Under GR 17/2025, “children” is defined as anyone under 18 years old.
GR 17/2025 outlines the responsibilities of ESOs in managing online products, services, or features, overseeing child protection governance in electronic systems, and enforcing administrative sanctions. It applies to ESOs that develop or operate internet-connected products, services, or features, such as websites, mobile apps, social media platforms, or gaming services.
Regarding children’s personal data protection, GR 17/2025 addresses the following.
DPIA for children
ESOs must conduct a DPIA for any online product, service, or feature accessible to children before it is used by them. The DPIA should cover the processing activities, the provider’s interests, the necessity and proportionality of the processing, a risk assessment for children’s protection, and risk mitigation measures. Additionally, the ESO must maintain the DPIA documentation for as long as the product, service, or feature remains accessible to children, and include a plan to address identified risks before marketing the product.
Obligation to protect children’s personal data
ESOs must provide clear information on minimum age requirements and implement technical and operational measures to ensure appropriate age verification for children using online products, services, or features, and establish reporting mechanisms to challenge or adjust age verification decisions and address misuse of such online products, services, or features that violate or may violate children’s rights. These measures should align with specified risks and protect children’s personal data, secure electronic systems, and prevent unauthorised breaches. Data collected for age verification should only be used for that purpose and deleted once the age requirement is met. ESOs must also ensure that parental/guardian consent has been obtained for all processing of children’s data. There are no exceptions to the requirement to obtain parental or guardian consent for the use of children’s personal data.
Additionally, ESOs are prohibited from using children’s personal data in ways that could harm their physical, mental, or overall well-being, and from developing products that encourage excessive data collection. Data should only be processed if necessary for the service, unless there is a strong reason in the child’s best interest. Providers are also banned from using children’s data for other purposes without justifiable cause. Lastly, ESOs must appoint a DPO to oversee compliance with child data protection laws and regulations.
The MOCD also passed MOCD Regulation No 9 of 2026 on 6 March 2026 on the Implementation of GR 17/2025. Through the MOCD Reg. 9/2026 press release, the MOCD stated that children under the age of 16 are no longer eligible to create accounts on high-risk platforms as of 28 March 2026. Implementation will be conducted in a gradual manner, starting with platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, Bigo Live, and Roblox.
Furthermore, there are additional key points as follows:
Roles of DPOs in Indonesia
The PDP Law mandates that both data controllers and processors appoint an officer or staff member to oversee personal data protection functions and ensure compliance with regulations. Since the law’s enactment, the number of DPOs in Indonesia has increased, along with the formation of DPO associations. To standardise DPO competencies, the Minister of Manpower issued Decree No 103 of 2023, setting National Competency Standards for Personal Data Protection. These standards guide authorities in developing qualifications, training, and certification for DPOs. However, there is no requirement to register DPOs with authorities.
The government is also actively making efforts to conduct occupational mapping in the information and communication technology field (which encompasses functional areas such as IT governance (including DPOs and Data Protection Executives)), digital product development, etc) through Decree of the Head of the Communication and Digital Human Resources Development Agency of MOCD No 8 of 2025 on the National Occupational Map, as amended by Decree No 45 of 2025. The decree details qualifications, scope of work, tasks and authorities, and is intended to ensure the equal spread of occupation in personal data protection in each functional area.
Suggested approach to establish compliance in Indonesia
Business undertakings should adopt a risk-based approach, which involves identifying, assessing, and managing potential risks associated with personal data processing. Rather than treating all risks equally, businesses should allocate resources to areas that present the greatest threat to data security and privacy, ensuring efforts are proportionate to the risks involved. In doing so, organisations can prioritise the most critical compliance requirements effectively.
While there are currently fewer privacy-specific regulations on the use of AI, business undertakings in these sectors must still ensure compliance with the PDP Law. Business undertakings must also reassess their current cybersecurity measures in anticipation of the enactment of the Cybersecurity Bill, and ensure compliance with emerging child protection requirements in the digital space.
In light of the anticipated regulatory developments, business undertakings should closely monitor further updates to ensure timely awareness of any changes. This approach will allow business undertakings to take the necessary steps to anticipate any significant changes that may be introduced by the government from time to time. Early identification of material developments will allow sufficient time to implement the necessary compliance measures, thereby minimising operational risk and associated costs.
Graha CIMB Niaga
24th Floor
Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 58
Jakarta
12190
Indonesia
+62 21 250 5125/5136
+62 21 250 5001
info@abnrlaw.com www.abnrlaw.com