Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Penegakan hukum mengacu pada pasal 492 kuhp baru nomor 1 tahun 2023 (penipuan), pasal 28 ayat (1) jo. pasal 45 ayat (1) uu ite (penipuan elektronik), serta uu nomor 8 tahun 2010 tentang tppu apabila hasil kejahatan disamarkan. perkembangan cryptocurrency di indonesia diiringi dengan meningkatnya kasus ponzi scheme yang merugikan masyarakat dan menimbulkan tantangan bagi penegakan hukum. hingga kini belum ada aturan yang secara khusus mengatur tindak pidana skema ponzi berbasis cryptocurrency di indonesia, karena perkembangan kejahatan siber berlangsung lebih cepat dibandingkan hukum positif. akibatnya, karakteristik kejahatan ini belum sepenuhnya diakomodasi dalam peraturan perundang-undangan yang ada. penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan pengaturan hukum terhadap tindak pidana cryptocurrency ponzi scheme di indonesia ditinjau dari aspek regulasi dan menjelaskan kendala yang dihadapi dalam pengaturan hukum tindak pidana cryptocurrency ponzi scheme di indonesia metode yang digunakan yuridis-normatif yang bersifat deskriptif-analitis dengan pendekatan studi kepustakaan (library research) terhadap bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier. analisis data dilakukan secara kualitatif-normatif melalui metode deduktif dengan tahapan interpretasi, sistematis, dan evaluasi hukum. hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa hingga saat hingga saat ini, indonesia belum memiliki lex specialis untuk mengatur tindak pidana cryptocurrency ponzi scheme. penegakan hukum masih mengandalkan ketentuan hukum yang kumulatif, antara lain pasal 492 kuhp baru nomor 1 tahun 2023 (penipuan), pasal 28 ayat (1) jo. pasal 45 ayat (1) uu ite (penipuan elektronik), serta uu nomor 8 tahun 2010 tentang tppu apabila hasil kejahatan disamarkan melalui transaksi aset kripto. di sisi lain, peraturan menteri perdagangan nomor 99 tahun 2018, peraturan bappebti nomor 5 tahun 2019 beserta perubahannya, serta undang-undang nomor 4 tahun 2023 tentang pengembangan dan penguatan sektor keuangan memberikan kepastian mengenai kedudukan cryptocurrency sebagai komoditas yang diperdagangkan, namun belum mengatur secara spesifik penyalahgunaannya dalam skema investasi ponzi. kendala utama meliputi kendala substansi hukum, kendala struktur hukum, kendala teknis, kendala budaya hukum, dan kendala kelembagaan. disarankan agar pemerintah segera menyusun lex specialis yang mengatur tindak pidana cryptocurrency ponzi scheme dan melakukan harmonisasi regulasi untuk menciptakan kepastian hukum. selain itu, aparat penegak hukum dan instansi terkait perlu memperkuat kapasitas teknis, koordinasi antar lembaga, dan meningkatkan literasi keuangan digital masyarakat secara berkelanjutan.

Law enforcement in this regard refers to Article 492 of the New Criminal Code under Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning fraud, Article 28 paragraph (1) in conjunction with Article 45 paragraph (1) of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law concerning electronic fraud, as well as Law Number 8 of 2010 concerning the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering if the proceeds of crime are concealed or disguised. The development of cryptocurrency in Indonesia has been accompanied by an increasing number of Ponzi scheme cases that have caused losses to the public and posed challenges to law enforcement. To date, Indonesia has not enacted specific legislation governing cryptocurrency-based Ponzi schemes, as the development of cybercrime has progressed more rapidly than the existing positive law. Consequently, the distinctive characteristics of such criminal conduct have not been fully accommodated within the existing statutory framework. This research aims to examine the legal framework governing cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme-related criminal offences in Indonesia from a regulatory perspective and to identify the obstacles encountered in regulating such criminal offences in Indonesia. This research employs a juridical-normative method with a descriptive-analytical approach, utilizing library research on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The data were analyzed using a qualitative-normative method through deductive reasoning, involving the stages of legal interpretation, legal systematization, and legal evaluation. The results of the research demonstrate that, to date, Indonesia has no lex specialis specifically governing cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme-related criminal offences. Law enforcement continues to rely on the cumulative application of existing legal provisions, including Article 492 of the New Criminal Code under Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning fraud, Article 28 paragraph (1) in conjunction with Article 45 paragraph (1) of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law concerning electronic fraud, and Law Number 8 of 2010 concerning the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering where the proceeds of crime are concealed through crypto-asset transactions. Meanwhile, Minister of Trade Regulation Number 99 of 2018, Bappebti Regulation Number 5 of 2019 and its amendments, as well as Law Number 4 of 2023 concerning the Development and Strengthening of the Financial Sector, provide legal certainty regarding the status of cryptocurrency as a tradable commodity but do not specifically regulate its misuse in Ponzi investment schemes. The principal obstacles comprise substantive legal constraints, structural legal constraints, technical constraints, legal culture constraints, and institutional constraints. It is recommended that the Government promptly formulate a lex specialis governing cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme-related criminal offences and harmonize the relevant regulations to establish greater legal certainty. In addition, law enforcement authorities and relevant institutions should strengthen their technical capabilities and inter-agency coordination, while continuously enhancing public digital financial literacy.