Skip to main content

A Legal Analysis on Online Fraud Using Fake Identity

Hasibuan, Juneidi ; Syam, Syafrudin (2023) — Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.55324/ijoms.v2i10.574 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Indonesia
Tags:   AI-Enabled Fraud, Catfishing, Cross Cultural, Fake Identity, Law Enforcement, Legal Accountability, Measurement, Online Dating Platforms, Online Fraud, Prevention, Psychology, Romance Scams, Victim Experience
Citation tools
Download RIS Download BibTeX 


              
              

            

          

        


      

      

    

        
Transparency

        
Evidence and review status

        
This page contains AI-generated content. No human content review or subject-matter-expert review is recorded.

    


    

                    

                
Source basis

                

                    Downloaded PDF
                

            

                    

                
AI-generated page content

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Automated checks

                

                    Passed
                

            

                    

                
Administrative approval

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Human content review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

                    

                
Subject-matter-expert review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

            


    

        
            How this was prepared
        
        

                            

                    
Source basis

                    

                    
RSRC downloaded and privately stored a copy of the paper for internal analysis. The PDF is not offered to viewers from this page.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    PDF added to RSRC:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
AI-generated page content

                    

                    
AI-generated research notes displayed on this page: Synopsis, Identified gaps, Methods, Limitations, Future work. The paper itself is not described as AI-generated.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Document analysis recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Synopsis generation recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Page record updated:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Automated checks

                    

                    
The current, source-bound synopsis passed the recorded versioned publication checks.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Checks completed:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                            

                            
                                View passed checks (3)
                            
                            
    
                                                                    
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
    • 
                                                                    
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
    • 
                                                                    
  • English-source lexical grounding check
    • 
                                                            

                        

                                        

                

                            

                    
Administrative approval

                    

                    
An authenticated administrator approved the bibliographic record for public Library display. This is not a review of every research claim.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Approved for public display:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Human content review

                    

                    
No human review is recorded for the AI-generated content displayed on this page.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Subject-matter-expert review

                    

                    
RSRC has not recorded review of this content by a subject-matter or methods expert.


                    
                                        

                

                    

    


    

        Review-state definitions

        Found a possible error?
        Request a correction.
    



    



              

        
                  

            
Synopsis

            
The publication presents a legal analysis of online fraud conducted under fake identities, commonly referred to as catfishing. Its stated purpose is to examine legal accountability for catfishing and to understand how different jurisdictions respond to online fraud that relies on false identities. The authors employ document analysis and literature review, drawing on laws, court decisions, and scholarly sources to map how catfishing intersects with criminal and cybercrime frameworks. The study reports that catfishing can amount to illegal acts in some countries and under certain legal regimes, with specific attention to Indonesian law. It discusses the Criminal Code’s general fraud provisions and explains how Law No. 11 of 2008 on Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE) and related articles can be used to prosecute online fraud, even when fraudsters use fake identities. The authors also note substantive enforcement challenges, including difficulties in identifying perpetrators, cross-border jurisdiction concerns, evidence limitations, and the evolving technical means used to disguise identities. In addition to legal analysis, the article surveys factors that hinder law enforcement, such as victim embarrassment, social stigma, regulatory gaps, and technological sophistication. It emphasizes the need for improved collaboration among government, law enforcement, online platforms, and the public to strengthen accountability and protect victims. The authors conclude with practical guidance cautioning readers about online scams and calling for a robust legal framework that can address the unique features of online fraud, while acknowledging the limitations of current enforcement tools and the patchwork of international regulation. The synthesis is grounded in the source material and avoids unsupported extrapolation beyond what the cited authorities and analyses claim.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
The paper identifies gaps in clear, specific legal rules for online catfish fraud; compatibility of regulations across countries; cross-border enforcement and information exchange; and authorities' technical capacity to identify offenders using anonymous accounts, VPNs, photo manipulation, and artificial intelligence. It also identifies victim-reporting barriers related to shame, stigma, fear, and limited evidence.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
This is a legal doctrinal-style study using document analysis and literature review. The authors searched scientific journals and books, analyzed relevant texts and legal documents, including laws, regulations, court decisions, and government policies, and used a documentation technique to analyze the collected material.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
The study relies on documents and literature rather than primary victim, offender, platform, or law-enforcement data. The supplied text does not specify search databases, inclusion criteria, the number of sources reviewed, or a systematic analytic procedure. Its conclusions therefore provide broad legal and conceptual discussion but limited empirical evidence about prevalence, victim experiences, reporting, or intervention effectiveness.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Future research could assess which cross-border cooperation, platform measures, and public-awareness approaches most effectively improve identification, reporting, victim protection, and accountability in catfishing cases. Research could also examine legal frameworks that address rapidly evolving digital disguise technologies and inconsistent jurisdictional rules.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

            See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.