I n troduction

The State believes that children are the buds, the potential, and the young generation who will carry forward the ideals of the nation’s struggle, as implicitly enshrined in the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Children play a strategic role and possess specific characteristics and qualities that ensure the continued existence of the nation and the State in the future. A child is defined as a person who has not yet reached the age of 18 (eighteen) years, including a child still in the womb. The State ensures and guarantees that children are afforded the widest possible opportunities to grow and develop optimally, physically, mentally and socially. This includes ensuring that, should a child become a victim of a criminal offence, the State guarantees the fulfilment of their rights without discrimination.

Sexual violence offences have become a major concern in criminal cases across the country. Not only are they subject to criminal law, but incidents of sexual violence also inevitably deprive victims of their human rights [1]. Generally speaking, human rights in Indonesia are enshrined in Articles 28A to 28J of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Indonesia has also ratified several international instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). This demonstrates that Indonesia holds human rights in the highest regard, in line with the ‘Asta Cita’ concept put forward by the President of Indonesia, Prabowo Subianto.

Addressing sexual violence requires cross-sectoral support, one aspect of which is the social structures that exist within the community. A culture of tolerance towards forms of sexual violence, such as verbal sexual violence, gradually alters the social structures that have developed within the community [2] thereby constructively fuelling fluctuations in the prevalence of sexual violence. This phenomenon inevitably blurs the distinction between criminal offences and ordinary behaviour. It is this challenge that must be recognised and addressed in an appropriate and structured manner.

Widespread sexual violence occurs as a result of the normalisation of victim-blaming cultural attitudes, gender bias and the objectification of victims [3]. This situation demonstrates that sexual violence cannot be understood solely as a matter of the perpetrator’s individual behaviour, but is also linked to the social constructs that shape society’s perception of victims. A victim-blaming culture, for example, tends to place the blame on the victim, viewing them as partly responsible for the violence they have experienced, whether due to their choice of clothing, behaviour, social relationships, or their activities in the digital sphere. If this pattern continues, sexual violence not only risks recurring but may also lead to secondary victimisation, as victims face stigma, social pressure, or insensitive treatment following the offence.

Many perpetrators of sexual violence do not take into account the victim’s status, position, level of education, gender or age [4]. This demonstrates that sexual violence is a criminal offence that can occur within various social relationships and is not limited to specific social groups. Children’s vulnerability is further compounded by their limited experience, knowledge and ability to recognise exploitative or manipulative behaviour. Consequently, efforts to prevent and address sexual violence cannot be focused solely on the characteristics of the victim or the perpetrator, but must take into account the social environment, power dynamics, the nature of the digital space, and the various factors that enable victimisation to occur.

The high number of sexual violence cases in which children are the victims indicates that this phenomenon cannot be understood solely on the basis of the characteristics of the victims or the perpetrators. Efforts to prevent and address sexual violence must be comprehensive, taking into account the social environment, power relations, the characteristics of the digital space, and various factors that may influence and increase the risk of child victimisation. Previous studies have primarily examined child sexual violence from the perspective of criminal liability and victim protection, while studies integrating cyber victimology, secondary victimisation, and risk management remain limited. Research conducted by Siregar [5] confirms that sexual violence against children is perpetrated not only by external perpetrators (strangers unknown to the child), but also within the immediate family (such as parents and relatives) and in schools.

Research conducted by Nafilatul Ain [6] on sexual violence against children in schools found that the most important aspect of case management is understanding that sexual violence is not the fault of the child victim. This understanding forms a vital foundation for establishing response mechanisms centred on the child’s best interests, as every action or decision regarding the victim must protect the child from pressure, stigma and the tendency to blame the victim. Child victims are often in a psychologically and socially vulnerable state, particularly if the perpetrator is someone who has a close relationship with, authority over, or influence on the victim within the school environment. Such relationships can make it difficult for the child to disclose what has happened, cause them to fear the possible consequences, or even lead them to view the abuse they have suffered as something that must be kept secret.

1.776 Cases of Sexual Violence in Indonesia

1.464 Cases where the victims include children

Figure 1. Data on Cases of Sexual Violence in Indonesia

According to a report compiled by the Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK), a total of 1,776 applications for protection were recorded in 2025, of which 1,464 were submitted by or related to child victims. These figures demonstrate that children are one of the groups most vulnerable to criminal offences, particularly sexual violence, whilst also reflecting the continuing severity of child protection issues in Indonesia. Every child has the right to protection, a sense of security, and the opportunity to grow and develop to their full potential, in accordance with the principle of the best interests of the child. However, in reality, children are often the targets of various forms of violence that result in the violation of their fundamental rights, including through sexual violence.

Nowadays, as a result of modern developments, children have become heavily reliant on technology but lack the necessary skills to maintain personal boundaries and recognise interactions that carry a risk of sexual violence [7]. The complexity of this issue is increasing in line with the rapid development of information and communication technology, which is also creating new avenues for sexual offences against children. The digital world enables perpetrators to use a variety of methods that are more difficult to detect, including online grooming, online sexual exploitation of children, the dissemination of sexually explicit content involving children, sexual blackmail (sextortion), and the distribution of child sexual abuse material. Technological advancements not only bring benefits to children’s lives but also present new challenges in ensuring that the needs of child victims of sexual violence are met in terms of safety, protection and recovery.

Victimology is a branch of criminal law [8] that studies victims in the context of their social circumstances, status and the fulfilment of their rights in relation to a criminal offence. Victims of criminal offences are parties who are absolutely entitled to attention, protection and redress for the harm they have suffered [9], whether physical or psychological. Indeed, critical victimology holds the view that victims must never be positioned as the party at fault, but rather as individuals who have simply been subjected to a criminal offence, and whose rights must be guaranteed by the state and society.

Double victimisation occurs when an individual is victimised twice simultaneously in a particular case, in a continuous and gradual manner [10]. In the context of child sexual abuse, this means that the child is victimised twice in succession as a result of a single criminal offence they have experienced. A child’s suffering does not always end once the criminal case has been dealt with, but may continue through various social responses or case-handling processes that place the victim in a vulnerable position. Double victimisation can exacerbate the impact already experienced by the child, whether psychologically, socially, or in terms of their growth and development. Sexual violence against children in the digital world poses a very serious risk because content or information about the victim can be disseminated, copied and accessed again without any spatial or temporal limits. Consequently, double victimisation is not only an additional problem for the victim, but also a threat to the child’s recovery, sense of security and the fulfilment of their rights, which require special attention within the victim protection system.

Based on the above, this study focuses on examining: (a) the forms of double victimisation experienced by child victims of sexual violence in the cyber world, and (b) the appropriate model for managing the risk of double victimisation among child victims of sexual violence in the cyber world. It is hoped that this research focus will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the factors and forms of double victimisation faced by child victims, whilst also identifying weaknesses in the victim protection mechanisms that have been implemented to date. It is further hoped that the research findings will form the basis for risk management that is preventative, adaptive and oriented towards the fulfilment of the rights and recovery of child victims of sexual violence in the cyber world.

Met h od

This study employs a normative legal research method, which involves evaluating legal substance—such as court rulings and legislation—as well as the effectiveness of their implementation [11], particularly in addressing the challenge of double victimisation faced by child victims of sexual violence in the digital world. Data collection was carried out using a documentary study approach, gathering primary and secondary legal materials [12], which were then analysed using qualitative analysis techniques. Primary legal materials include Act No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code, Act No. 12 of 2022 on Sexual Violence Offences, Act No. 17 of 2016 on Child Protection as amended by Act No. 23 of 2002, Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions as amended by Law No. 1 of 2024, Law No. 11 of 2012 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, court rulings relating specifically to juvenile criminal cases (Judgments No. 1477/Pid.Sus/2024/PN.Plg, 146/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.Mtk, and 025/Pid.Sus-Anak/2015/PN.Jkt.Pst), and other regulations under the law that are relevant to the topic under investigation. As for secondary legal sources, these consist of academic journals, books, articles and other published materials that discuss child sexual abuse in the digital world. Using a socio-legal and cyber-victimological approach, this study seeks to capture the legal experiences of child victims and survivors of cyber sexual abuse within their social, economic and political contexts [13]. The socio-legal approach is used as an analytical perspective to examine the relationship between legal norms and social reality in their practical application [14]. The findings of this research are presented using a descriptive-qualitative approach, thereby providing a realistic, critical and easily understandable picture, both in terms of urgency and perspective [15]. This research culminates in considerations for decision-making and policy formulation that are expected to be victim-oriented, particularly with regard to children.

Results and Discussion

A. Analysing the Phenomenon of Double Victimisation in Sexual Offences against Children in the Cyber World, Along with the Relevant Regulations

The prevalence of cases of sexual violence against children is due to the fact that children are regarded as a group characterised by a high degree of vulnerability [16]. This is beyond doubt, as children are indeed a vulnerable group who are highly susceptible to becoming victims of criminal acts. All forms of vulnerability, such as the risk of becoming a victim of sexual violence, place women, children, people with disabilities and minority groups [17] as priority groups for the state in terms of protection and the fulfilment of human rights. The fulfilment of human rights should also extend to victims of criminal offences such as sexual violence.

Sexual violence against children not only causes physical and psychological harm to the victims, but also highlights the shortcomings of the state’s legal system in protecting the next generation [18]. As the heirs to the nation’s civilisation and culture, children play a strategic role in carrying the torch of life forward, both in terms of the governance of the state and the continuity of the state’s existence. To this end, the state is expected to act as the guardian of the social institutions that underpin society, in order to create a civil society characterised by noble moral values in accordance with the principles of Pancasila. However, at the level of law enforcement, although the state has established clear regulations, this is not sufficient to bring the perpetrators of these crimes to justice.

The imposition of severe custodial sentences has apparently not been sufficient to curb cases of sexual violence against children [19]. Sentences or sanctions for criminal acts of sexual violence against children must be interpreted as broadly as possible [20] and be geared towards ensuring the victims’ rights are upheld. The prosecution of perpetrators should not be viewed as the ultimate goal of law enforcement, but rather as one part of a series of efforts to provide justice, protection and recovery for child victims. The juvenile justice process must ensure that child victims are afforded the right to safety, confidentiality of identity, support, psychological recovery, restitution (compensation), and protection from the possibility of further victimisation. This phenomenon becomes even more serious when sexual violence against children occurs via digital media, as the nature of cyberspace allows sexual material, personal information and digital traces relating to the victim to be disseminated rapidly, repeatedly and across national borders.

Cyber victimology is highly relevant to cases of sexual violence against children committed in the cyber world, as it identifies the phenomenon, examines applicable regulations, assesses the impact, and explores measures aimed at achieving justice and ensuring the fulfilment of victims’ rights [21]. Cyber sexual violence—or, as it is commonly referred to in legislation, online gender-based violence (KBGO)—is a form of gender-based violence facilitated by technological devices, computer networks or artificial intelligence (AI), where these acts are carried out with the intention of harassing victims on the basis of their gender or even their sexual identity [22]. Within the framework of this research, gender is not merely understood as the biological differences and reproductive functions of men and women; rather, it refers to the roles developed within social and cultural structures [23].

Recently, the Ministry of Communications and Digital Affairs (Komdigi) issued Ministerial Regulation No. 9 of 2026 on the Implementing Regulations for Government Regulation No. 17 of 2025 concerning the Governance of Electronic Systems in Child Protection. This policy is expected not only to serve as an instrument to curb potential external threats through regulation and supervision, but also to encourage public involvement in establishing internal protection mechanisms. Consequently, access to a number of digital applications and services by children will be restricted as part of efforts to create a safer digital space for this age group. The policy of restricting children’s access to digital services is not, in essence, an entirely new approach, as a number of countries have already implemented similar policies as part of their strategies for protecting children in the digital space.

Table 1. Regulations in Indonesia on Cyber Sexual Violence

With the enactment of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code, the direction of criminal law applicable nationwide has been aligned with developments in the life of the nation and with a view to upholding fundamental human rights [24]. The handling of crime should not be limited to criminal sanctions as the sole method, but should also involve non-criminal measures [25] such as ensuring victims’ rights are upheld. This approach positions victims as a vital part of the overall law enforcement process, so that the success of criminal justice is not measured solely by the state’s ability to impose sanctions on perpetrators, but also by the extent to which victims receive protection, redress and guarantees of their rights.

Table 2. The Rights of Child Victims of Online Sexual Abuse

Ensuring that victims’ rights are upheld is a key measure in preventing double victimisation of victims of sexual violence. When victims’ rights to protection, confidentiality of identity, support, information, health and psychological services, restitution and recovery are not fully upheld, they are at risk of experiencing further stress, stigma, intimidation or degrading treatment both during and after the case-handling process. In victimological studies, secondary victimisation can be understood as a situation in which a victim who has already experienced a criminal offence suffers further harm, stress, or degrading treatment as a result of the response from the social environment or the case-handling system. For victims of sexual violence, the most common form is victim blaming, whereby the victim is positioned as the party deemed to have contributed to the violence, for example through questions regarding their clothing, behaviour, relationship with the perpetrator, social media activity, or the victim’s decisions at the time of the incident [26]. Other forms include stigmatisation and social judgement, such as negative labelling, ostracism, the dissemination of personal information, and pressure from family or the wider community to prevent the victim from pursuing legal action.

The National Commission on Violence Against Women specifically notes that double victimisation can occur when victims are subjected to questions or statements that are demeaning and place the blame on them during legal proceedings, even when they face threats or are counter-reported by the perpetrator. Not to mention Article 70(1)(h) of the Criminal Code, which introduces the concept of ‘victim precipitation’ in relation to a criminal offence. It is believed that this provision could open the door to double victimisation of the victim.

Double victimisation becomes increasingly multidimensional when sexual violence takes place or leaves a trace in the digital space. Victims may experience the re-sharing of intimate content, the disclosure of their identity and personal data (doxing), repeated harassment via social media, sexual blackmail (sextortion), cyberstalking, or the redistribution of sexual material without the victim’s consent. The nature of digital technology means that these forms of victimisation have the potential to recur, as material that has already been circulated can be copied, downloaded, modified and redistributed by others, meaning that victims may experience the same violence or new forms of violence even after the original perpetrator has been prosecuted. The National Commission on Violence Against Women also noted that in 2025, there were 1,091 cases of online gender-based violence (KBGO) identified in complaint data, with 977 cases – or 90 percent – of these being sexual KBGO.

This situation demonstrates that secondary victimisation stems not only from the perpetrator’s behaviour, but can also arise from the system’s failure to protect the victim’s identity, delays in removing content, victim-unfriendly investigations, media coverage that exposes the victim’s identity, and a public response that blames the victim [27]. Child sexual abuse in the cyber world, with the various characteristics of the digital space, allows for repeated, rapid and difficult-to-control victimisation, even after criminal proceedings against the perpetrator have been concluded. Consequently, a dual victimisation risk management model is required that is not only focused on addressing the situation after harm has occurred, but is also capable of identifying, assessing, intervening, facilitating recovery and continuously monitoring risks. This model can serve as a systematic framework for law enforcement agencies, victim protection organisations, electronic system operators, support workers, and other stakeholders to ensure that every intervention actually strengthens victim protection and does not become a source of further victimisation. With the development of such a model, cyber victimology can evolve from merely understanding victims’ experiences towards a risk management mechanism that is preventative, adaptive and oriented towards the victims’ ongoing recovery. The proposed TRISA risk-management framework is presented in Table 3.

B. A Risk Management Model for the Double Victimisation of Children as Victims of Sexual Offences in the Cyber World

When a child is the victim, in their judgement, judges scarcely address the issue of non-pecuniary damages (such as the victim’s psychological condition) [28] as either an aggravating factor in the perpetrator’s sentence or as a basis for awarding compensation to the victim. Yet the provision of protection for victims of sexual violence, particularly when the victim is a child, reflects the state’s commitment to the advancement of human rights [29]. In the Palembang District Court Judgment No. 1477/Pid.Sus/2024/PN.Plg, the defendant, identified by the initials IV, was found proven beyond reasonable doubt to have committed the criminal offence of sexual violence against a child and was sentenced to a cumulative term of 11 years’ imprisonment and a fine of one billion rupiah, on the condition that, should the fine not be paid, it shall be replaced by a custodial sentence of 3 months. Unfortunately, the ruling does not demonstrate that the victims’ rights—which should form part of legal protection—have been upheld, particularly with regard to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. This situation shows that the court’s ruling, as the state’s representative in carrying out its law enforcement function, has not yet fully recognised the victims’ losses and need for recovery as an integral part of justice. The imposition of a criminal sentence on the perpetrator is indeed a form of accountability for the acts committed [30], but it does not in itself address the physical, psychological and social impacts, or other losses, suffered by the victim.

As for law enforcement efforts in cases of sexual violence, as reflected in Judgments No. 1477/Pid.Sus/2024/PN.Plg, 146/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.Mtk, and 025/Pid.Sus-Anak/2015/PN.Jkt.Pst., no judgment was found to have ordered restitution, compensation or rehabilitation for child victims. The judges’ reasoning in these cases tended to focus on the aspects of punishment and the perpetrator’s accountability, whilst the victims’ need for recovery has not been adequately addressed in the judgments. This situation indicates that the approach to law enforcement remains predominantly punitive rather than victim-centred. Yet, the impact of sexual violence against children does not end with the commission of the offence, but can result in long-term physical, psychological, social and developmental harm to the child [31]. Indeed, in some of these judgements, the sanctions imposed on the perpetrators can also be categorised as relatively lenient when compared to the impact on the victims. This phenomenon highlights the need to strengthen the perspective of victim protection and recovery within the criminal justice process, so that law enforcement is not solely oriented towards punishing perpetrators, but is also capable of delivering substantive justice for child victims.

To this end, an approach is required that is not only focused on addressing the situation after a criminal offence has occurred, but is also capable of identifying and managing the various risks that could lead to victims experiencing further victimisation. This approach needs to be incorporated into a systematic model for managing the risk of secondary victimisation, ranging from risk identification, vulnerability assessment, intervention and recovery, through to ongoing monitoring. The model developed can serve as an operational framework to strengthen the protection of child victims of sexual violence, particularly in addressing the characteristics of the cyber environment that enable repeated and ongoing victimisation.

Table 3. The TRISA Model: Risk Management for Child Victims of Cyber Sexual Abuse

The protection of child victims of sexual violence in the digital world is also a manifestation of respect for human dignity and human rights, in accordance with the provisions of the constitution and various international human rights instruments [32]. Children, as individuals who have not yet attained physical and psychological maturity, require special protection [33] from all forms of violence, exploitation and even secondary victimisation. Sexual violence occurring in the digital space demands a protection paradigm capable of addressing the characteristics of digital victimisation, which are characterised by anonymity, spontaneity, recurrence and difficulty in control. Child protection must be viewed as an ongoing process that guarantees the safety, recovery and fulfilment of victims’ rights [34]. On this basis, the TRISA Model was developed as an instrument focused on the prevention and management of the risk of ongoing double victimisation. The law enforcement system must not only ensure that perpetrators are punished, but must also be able to prevent further suffering for child victims [35]. The TRISA Model offers a series of strategic stages, ranging from Threat Mapping, Risk Assessment, Integrated Intervention, Safeguarding and Support, to Adaptive Monitoring and Evaluation, as a unified protection mechanism. It is hoped that this model will serve as both a conceptual and operational framework for preventing and minimising the double victimisation of child victims of sexual violence in the digital world.

Conclusions

Sexual violence against children, particularly that occurring in the digital space, is an issue that relates not only to the prosecution of perpetrators, but also to the fulfilment, protection and restoration of victims’ rights. Although Indonesia has various legal instruments governing sexual violence and the rights of child victims, their implementation still faces challenges in the form of double victimisation through victim blaming, stigma, disclosure of identity, the re-sharing of content, and weaknesses in case-handling mechanisms. The nature of the online environment, which allows victimisation to occur repeatedly and is difficult to control, highlights the need for a cyber-victimology approach that goes beyond merely identifying victims, but is also capable of anticipating the risk of further victimisation. Consequently, a systematic, preventative, adaptive and victim-centred risk management model is required, encompassing the stages of identification, assessment, intervention, protection, recovery, as well as monitoring and evaluation, to ensure that the rights and best interests of the child remain the priority throughout the entire handling process.

Law enforcement in cases of sexual violence against children still tends to focus on the punishment of perpetrators and has not yet fully recognised the recovery and fulfilment of victims’ rights as an integral part of justice. The suboptimal provision of restitution, compensation, rehabilitation and attention to non-material harm highlights the need for a more victim-centred approach. This situation is exacerbated in the digital space, where victimisation can occur repeatedly and persistently. To this end, the TRISA Model—comprising the stages of Threat Mapping, Risk Assessment, Integrated Intervention, Safeguarding and Support, and Adaptive Monitoring and Evaluation—is proposed as a systematic risk management framework to identify, prevent, address and monitor the risk of secondary victimisation, whilst ensuring the ongoing protection and recovery of child victims.

A cknowledgements

The researcher would like to express their deepest gratitude and appreciation to the Directorate of Research and Community Service, the Directorate-General of Research and Development, the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia, and Duta Bangsa University, Surakarta, for the support, trust and assistance provided throughout the conduct of this research, both in the form of moral support and funding under contract number 196/KPA/C3/KPT2026, 042/LL6/AL.04.03/PL-BARU/2026, 055/UDB.LPPM/A.34-HK/II/2026. These contributions were a key factor in enabling this research to be carried out and successfully completed. The researchers hope that the findings of this study will be of benefit, not only as a contribution to the advancement of knowledge, particularly in the fields of law and cyber victimology, but also as a reference in efforts to strengthen the protection system for child victims and survivors of sexual violence in the cyber world. This research is contributed to be of value to stakeholders, practitioners, academics and the wider public in promoting the realisation of more effective, comprehensive and rights-based policies and practices for the protection of child victims.

Referen ces

1. R. Paradiaz and E. Soponyono, “Perlindungan hukum terhadap korban pelecehan seksual,” J. Pembang. Huk. Indones., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 61–72, 2022, doi: 10.14710/jphi.v4i1.61-72.
2. A. A. W. P. P. Dewi, A. A. S. L. Dewi, and L. P. Suryani, “Penghapusan kekerasan seksual dalam melindungi korban pelecehan seksual secara verbal (catcalling) di Indonesia,” JPH, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 108–114, 2022, doi: 10.22225/jph.3.1.4663.108-114.
3. Y. Saefudin, F. R. N. Wahidah, R. Susanti, L. K. Adi, and P. M. Putri, “Tindak pidana kekerasan seksual dan perlindungan hukum bagi korban kekerasan seksual di Indonesia,” J. Kosmik Huk., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 24–33, 2023, doi: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v23i1.17320.
4. N. Adri, A. Najemi, and Y. Monita, “Pemenuhan hak ganti rugi bagi anak korban kekerasan seksual,” PJC, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 62–71, 2024, doi: 10.22437/pampas.v5i1.31815.
5. F. R. Siregar, M. J. Rambe, and V. Ardiansyah, “Kebijakan hukum pidana terhadap pelaku tindak pidana kekerasan seksual pada anak di Kota Medan,” J. Rectum, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 22–31, 2023, doi: 10.46930/jurnalrectum.v5i2.3144.
6. N. Ain, A. F. Mahmudah, A. M. P. Susanto, and I. Fauzi, “Analisis diagnostik fenomena kekerasan seksual di sekolah,” JPDK, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 49–58, 2022, doi: 10.47435/jpdk.v7i2.1318.
7. M. Savitri and T. N. Fatihah, “Tinjauan yuridis mengenai perlindungan data pribadi dan pencegahan kekerasan seksual terhadap anak di bawah umur dalam menggunakan gawai dan media sosial di Indonesia,” IBLAM Law Review, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 58–68, 2025, doi: 10.52249/ilr.v5i2.614.
8. M. Amin and A. Nurkartiko, “Perlindungan hukum perempuan korban kekerasan seksual yang mengalami blaming the victim ditinjau dari perspektif viktimologi,” ULR, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 4140–4160, 2023, doi: 10.31933/unesrev.v5i4.732.
9. T. A. Harahap and A. Safiq, “Victim blaming dalam kasus kekerasan seksual: Telaah viktimologi dan perlindungan korban,” Fatih: J. Contemporary Res., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 261–276, 2026, doi: 10.61253/aemwpa31.
10. Hidayati and H. Irhamdessetya, “Aspek viktimologi ganda dan perlindungan hukum anak sebagai saksi-orban sekunder KDRT di Indonesia: Aspects of double victimology and legal protection of children as secondary victims-witnesses of domestic violence in Indonesia,” JPL, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 140–159, 2025, doi: 10.31949/jpl.v7i2.15068.
11. S. Yulianingsih and R. K. Putra, “Analisis yuridis tentang perlindungan konsumen pada e-commerce di Indonesia: Pendekatan yuridis-normatif,” Hakim, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 842–856, 2024, doi: 10.51903/hakim.v2i4.2204.
12. Suyanto, Metode Penelitian Hukum: Pengantar Penelitian Normatif, Empiris dan Gabungan. Gresik, Indonesia: Unigres Press, 2023, pp. 67–89.
13. M. A. Saifuddin, “Stratifikasi sosial dan ketidaksetaraan akses keadilan: Analisis sosio-legal terhadap sistem peradilan Indonesia,” Int. J. Demos, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 238–252, 2025, doi: 10.37950/ijd.v7i4.627.
14. K. Kaharuddin, “Legal sociology approach: A critical study on understanding the law,” Velrev, vol. 6, no. Special Issues, pp. 54–69, 2023, doi: 10.35586/velrev.v6iSpecialIssues.4955.
15. M. S. Sumardjono, Bahan Kuliah: Metode Penelitian Ilmu Hukum. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Gadjah Mada, 2021, pp. 55–65.
16. K. Nisa and N. T. Mulyasari, “Bantuan hukum terhadap anak korban tindak pidana kekerasan seksual di Indonesia,” JRH, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 45–60, 2023, doi: 10.30872/risalah.v19i1.1023.
17. R. F. Nabih, N. M. Maryam, and N. Rahmawati, “Analisis penegakan hukum dan HAM terhadap korban kekerasan seksual pada perempuan dan anak sebagai kelompok rentan,” J. Islamic Law Stud., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 207–224, 2024, doi: 10.18592/jils.v8i2.13569.
18. S. Cahyadi and R. Rasji, “Perspektif hukum terhadap perlindungan anak korban kekerasan seksual dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2022,” ULR, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 10304–10311, 2024, doi: 10.31933/unesrev.v6i4.2004.
19. Heriyanti, K. Pakpahan, D. S. Pinayungan, L. S. Pane, and G. S. Sormin, “Upaya penanggulangan kekerasan seksual terhadap anak di SD Kota Medan,” J. Interpretasi Huk., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 300–307, 2023, doi: 10.22225/juinhum.4.2.7597.300-307.
20. D. Handoko and Y. Widowaty, “Analisis perlindungan hukum terhadap anak sebagai korban kejahatan kekerasan seksual,” Media Law Sharia, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 14–33, 2022, doi: 10.18196/mls.v4i1.17208.
21. P. Guntara, P. P. Harmastuti, C. A. Putra, and F. Liani, “Cyber victimology: Innovative models and mechanisms for protecting child victims of sexual violence crimes in the context of cybercrime,” JLPH, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 386–397, 2025, doi: 10.38035/jlph.v6i1.2489.
22. F. Faizah and M. R. Hariri, “Pelindungan hukum terhadap korban revenge porn sebagai bentuk kekerasan berbasis gender online ditinjau dari Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2022 tentang Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual,” JHLG, vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 520–541, 2022, doi: 10.56370/jhlg.v3i7.281.
23. D. H. Salsabila and R. Susanti, “Kekerasan seksual berbasis gender online dalam perspektif Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2022 tentang Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual,” UMPLR, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 269–280, 2024, doi: 10.30595/umplr.v4i2.16398.
24. S. W. Eddyono, “The relationship between human rights and criminal law: A human rights-based criminal justice system,” in International Human Rights and Local Courts, vol. 1. London, U.K.: Routledge, 2024, pp. 114–135, doi: 10.4324/9781003431350-7.
25. M. B. Sutantiyo, “Kebijakan kriminal terhadap penanggulangan kekerasan seksual kepada anak dihubungkan dengan perlindungan anak,” J. Riset Ilmu Huk., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 101–106, 2023, doi: 10.29313/jrih.v3i2.2872.
26. S. N. Ubino and K. Astuti, “The impact of victim blaming on social media and handling efforts for victims of sexual violence,” RH, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1623–1634, 2025, doi: 10.54518/rh.5.4.2025.758.
27. N. Ayuningtyas, S. Subekti, R. Ginting, and S. Supanto, “Legal justice for revenge porn victims: Rethinking Indonesia’s cyber law from a victim-centered perspective,” RoLSJ, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 59–71, 2025, doi: 10.64780/rolsj.v1i1.37.
28. Y. Supriatna, S. Dewi, and M. Abas, “Kasus kekerasan seksual terhadap anak di bawah umur ditinjau dalam perspektif Undang-Undang Perlindungan Anak: Studi Putusan Nomor 10/Pid.Sus-Anak/2022/PN.Kwg,” Swara Justisia, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 349–358, 2024, doi: 10.31933/mgnxx857.
29. E. Susanti, “Tinjauan viktimologi terhadap korban kejahatan kekerasan seksual di Indonesia,” JILPers, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 33–45, 2024, doi: 10.70837/afg20c04.
30. W. Anggraini, E. Sudarti, and D. Rakhmawati, “Penjatuhan pidana terhadap pelaku tindak pidana pemaksaan melakukan persetubuhan terhadap anak,” PJC, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 379–389, 2024, doi: 10.22437/pampas.v5i3.38200.
31. A. Batian and Hartanto, “Kekerasan seksual terhadap anak: Dampak dan upaya perlindungan,” IJOLARES, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 32–41, 2024, doi: 10.60153/ijolares.v2i2.48.
32. Y. A. Siswanto and F. R. Miarsa, “Upaya preventif sebagai bentuk perlindungan hukum dari kejahatan kekerasan seksual pada anak,” J. Kolaboratif Sains, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 1651–1667, 2024, doi: 10.56338/jks.v7i5.5313.
33. R. Wijaya and E. R. Wulan, “Analisis viktimologi terhadap dampak psikologis korban kejahatan seksual anak dalam perspektif hukum pidana: Studi kasus tindakan asusila pemilik pesantren Ad-Diniyah dalam kaitannya dengan UU No. 1 Tahun 2023 tentang KUHP,” JSER, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 971–980, 2025, doi: 10.54783/jser.v7i2.1109.
34. L. Panggabean, T. Eddy, and A. Sahari, “Perlindungan hukum terhadap anak sebagai korban kekerasan seksual (analisis Undang-Undang Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban),” Iuris Studia: J. Kajian Huk., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 20–28, 2024, doi: 10.55357/is.v5i1.476.
35. W. I. Suryani and T. R. Gettari, “Law enforcement toward children as victims of pornographic crimes within the family sphere,” El-Ahli: J. Huk. Kel. Islam, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 87–98, 2025, doi: 10.56874/el-ahli.v6i1.2377.