Ci Mehong Questioned for 2.5 Hours at Polda Metro Jaya, Rejects Restorative Justice

Content creator and culinary entrepreneur Tjioe Nofia Handayani, known as Ci Mehong, arrived at the Directorate of Cyber Crime Investigation of Polda Metro Jaya on Friday (2/10) to be questioned as a victim-witness in an alleged case of editing and re-uploading digital content without permission. The questioning lasted about two and a half hours with 26 questions from investigators.

The case began when Ci Mehong found her content re-uploaded on social media on 14 July 2026. According to her, the material had been modified with added images and words that were not in the original version. She considers the act not only a copyright violation but also potentially defamatory and damaging to public trust in the culinary business she has built.

Ci Mehong's lawyer, Andri Budiman, said his client had tried to resolve the matter persuasively through four letters but received no adequate response. "We sent a clarification letter, and the first, second, and third legal warnings. Because there was no complete resolution, we are closing the door on restorative justice and choosing the applicable legal process," Andri said at the Ditres Siber office of Polda Metro Jaya.

Ci Mehong admitted she is physically and mentally exhausted by the legal process. "I am very tired; every day I am already worn out earning an honest living. But I have to report this because it has damaged my reputation," she said. She also cited immaterial losses in the form of stress that cannot be measured materially.

Andri added that his team is calculating the total losses, including the impact on social media accounts and immaterial losses. He also hinted that the case will be expanded to an allegation of defamation through Article 27 of the ITE Law, which carries heavier penalties.

This case highlights the gap in legal protection for content creators in Indonesia. Although the ITE Law prohibits altering digital material without permission, the practice of re-uploading with modifications remains widespread. Perpetrators often exploit other people's content to gain traffic or economic benefit, while victims bear the burden of proof and reputational loss.

Cyber law observers consider Ci Mehong's move could set an important precedent. "If this case is successfully brought to court, there will be a deterrent effect for those who illegally edit content. However, the process is long and exhausting for the victim," said an analyst who declined to be named.

Going forward, the public will wait to see whether investigators truly expand the case to Article 27 or keep it at Article 32. What is clear is that this case is a test for digital law enforcement in Indonesia, as well as a warning to anyone who likes to edit content without authorization.