Bamsoet: 'No viral, no justice' a stark warning for the legal system
Jakarta (ANTARA) – Indonesian House of Representatives member Bambang Soesatyo warned that the ‘no viral no justice’ phenomenon is a stark warning for the national legal system. While delivering a lecture for the Doctor of Law programme at Universitas Borobudur in Jakarta on Saturday, he stated that the phenomenon, increasingly evident across a range of legal cases in Indonesia, signals fundamental problems in the national law enforcement system.
“The expression reflects public disappointment with the legal process, which is seen as slow, and seeming to move only after a case goes viral on social media and attracts public-pressure,” the man known as Bamsoet said, according to a written statement.
“In fact, according to him, legal reform in Indonesia must create a sense of justice rooted in the constitution, local values, and capable of answering the challenges of the times.” When people feel their reports receive no response, social media becomes an alternative arena to seek justice.
Therefore, he said, this situation should be read as a warning to the state that public trust in the legal process is being tested.
The lecturer in the Doctor of Law programme at Universitas Borobudur argued that the ‘no viral no justice’ phenomenon on one hand has a positive impact by strengthening public oversight of law enforcement. Social media allows people to monitor state apparatus directly, while also driving transparency in case handling.
However, on the other hand, he continued, dependence on virality could pose serious problems for the rule of law. If law enforcement is overly influenced by public opinion pressure, the legal process could become a kind of trial by social media, or a court of public opinion on social media, risking undermining the principle of presumption of innocence and judicial independence.
Therefore Bamsoet stressed that justice must not depend on how viral a case is, so the law must proceed on facts, evidence, and fair procedures. “If justice only arrives after a viral case, there will be a perception that the law operates on popularity rather than professionalism,” he said.
Thus, he emphasised the importance of turning the ‘no viral no justice’ phenomenon into a momentum for comprehensive legal reform, in structural, cultural, and technological aspects. Legal reform, he added, must ensure every public report is processed quickly, transparently, and accountably without waiting for social media pressure.
Nevertheless, he warned that legal reform cannot rely solely on legislation, as many legal innovations arise from judicial interpretation, professional practice, or social movements. He described the phenomenon as part of the dynamic in which the judiciary not only resolves disputes but also safeguards constitutional limits and prevents the abuse of power.
“Legal reform must ensure every public report is processed transparently and can be monitored,” Bamsoet said.
Looking ahead, he argued that a digital reporting system should be developed to enable the public to track case developments openly. In addition, Bamsoet added, legal reform must strengthen oversight of law enforcement agencies to prevent discriminatory or selective enforcement.
In a modern rule-of-law country, he emphasised, justice must be accessible to all citizens regardless of social status, power, or the ability to viralise a case. It was stressed that a healthy rule of law is where people obtain justice without having to viralise their case first. “Virality should be a tool for transparency, not a prerequisite for justice,” he added.