The Influence of Digitalization Development on Threats Against Judges Outside the Court

In the era of digitalization development in the form of sophisticated technological tools, it has a major impact on the birth of PMKH innovations. One of these PMKH innovations can be in the form of hate speech on social media.

Hate speech on social media cannot be avoided because social media has become a daily consumption of society. This hate speech can be done by insulting judges, accusing or even threatening the safety of a judge. In this case, there is no role for the supervisory institution in supervising judges before the emergence of reports of alleged PMKH that occurred to the judge.

In fact, in reality, supervision and protection of judges are needed before PMKH occurs, this is in line with the term that reads: it is better to prevent than to cure.

If PMKH has occurred to a judge and the act is a PMKH that can threaten the safety of a judge, is protection needed after PMKH occurs?

True, most people think that protection is needed after PMKH occurs so that the PMKH that was done before does not happen again. That thought is true, but we need to know that protection is more important and very much needed before PMKH occurs in order to prevent unwanted acts, one of which is PMKH that threatens the safety of a judge.

Every decision issued by a judge should naturally have parties who do not accept the decision, namely parties who feel aggrieved by the issuance of the decision or parties who feel defeated in the battle in the court, so that the issuance of the decision gives rise to negative reactions that cannot be predicted by anyone.