Artificial Intelligence and Constitutional Law: Challenges to the Protection of Fundamental Rights in Indonesia

Abstract

Artificial intelligence has rapidly transformed the exercise of public and private power by enabling automated decision-making, predictive analysis, profiling, content generation, biometric processing, algorithmic recommendations, and large-scale data analysis. These developments provide significant opportunities for public administration, judicial services, economic development, and digital innovation, but they simultaneously create constitutional risks concerning privacy, equality, non-discrimination, freedom of expression, legal certainty, due process, human dignity, and access to effective remedies. This article examines the constitutional implications of artificial intelligence in Indonesia and evaluates whether the existing legal framework adequately protects fundamental rights against AI-related risks. The study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, comparative, and human-rights approaches. The analysis shows that Indonesia possesses several relevant constitutional and statutory safeguards, particularly Articles 28D, 28F, 28G, and 28I of the 1945 Constitution, Law Number 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection, the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, and Ministerial Circular Letter Number 9 of 2023 on Artificial Intelligence Ethics. Nevertheless, these instruments remain fragmented and were not specifically designed to regulate high-risk AI systems. Major regulatory gaps concern algorithmic discrimination, mandatory transparency, explainability, fundamental-rights impact assessment, independent algorithmic auditing, human oversight, public-sector automated decision-making, generative AI, synthetic content, and effective remedies. The article proposes a constitutional rights-based and risk-based AI governance model requiring stricter obligations for AI systems capable of significantly affecting citizens’ rights. Indonesia should transform existing ethical principles into binding rules while preserving innovation through differentiated regulation. Constitutional law must ultimately ensure that algorithmic power remains subordinate to human dignity, democratic accountability, legal certainty, and the protection of fundamental rights (Indraswara, 2026; Satya et al., 2026).