Victim Protection in Social Engineering Cybercrime: an Islamic Legal Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62951/ijls.v3i2.894Keywords:
Cybercrime Victims, Islamic Legal Protection, Maqāṣid Al-Sharī‘Ah, Offender Accountability, Social EngineeringAbstract
This research examines Islamic legal protection for victims of social engineering crimes within the context of cybercrime. Social engineering is a form of digital crime that exploits psychological manipulation and trust to obtain personal data, system access, or financial benefits. Such crimes cause not only material losses but also immaterial harm, including psychological trauma, violations of privacy, dignity, and personal security. However, positive legal frameworks tend to prioritize offender punishment, while victim protection and recovery remain insufficiently addressed. This study adopts a qualitative approach with a normative-juridical research design, complemented by limited empirical insights. Data were collected through library research on Islamic legal sources—namely the Qur’an, Hadith, and fiqh jināyah—alongside statutory regulations on cybercrime and selected interviews with legal scholars and practitioners. The analysis employs a descriptive-analytical method grounded in the maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah framework, particularly the principles of ḥifẓ al-māl (protection of property), ḥifẓ al-‘irḍ (protection of dignity), and ḥifẓ al-nafs (protection of life and psychological security). The findings demonstrate that Islamic law provides a robust normative foundation for protecting victims of social engineering crimes. Such protection extends beyond retributive punishment through ta‘zīr and emphasizes restorative justice by prioritizing victims’ rights restoration, offender accountability, and public welfare. Islamic law is both adaptive and relevant in addressing contemporary cybercrime challenges and may serve as a humanistic, just, and responsive model for victim protection in the digital era.
Downloads
References
Al-Ghazālī. (1993). Al-Mustaṣfā min 'ilm al-uṣūl. Dār al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah.
Al-Zuḥailī, W. (2011). Al-fiqh al-islāmī wa adillatuhu. Dār al-Fikr.
Ashworth, A. (2014). Positive obligations in criminal law. Hart Publishing.
Auda, J. (2008). Maqasid al-shariah as philosophy of Islamic law: A systems approach. International Institute of Islamic Thought. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvkc67tg
Brenner, S. W. (2010). Cybercrime: Criminal threats from cyberspace. Praeger. https://doi.org/10.5040/9798400636554
Button, M., & Cross, C. (2017). Cyber frauds, scams and their victims. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315679877
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588-608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589
Doerner, W. G., & Lab, S. P. (2018). Victimology (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315537054
Hadnagy, C. (2018). Social engineering: The science of human hacking (2nd ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119433729
HM, Pahrudin, & Hatta Abdi Muhammad, Burlian Senjaya, Samia Elviria, Zakly Hanafi Ahmad, Syafrial, Salman. (2026). The Study of Local Government Policy and its Impact on Public Satisfaction and Incumbent Electability: An Analysis of Experiences from Jambi Province. Jurnal Public Policy, Vol 12, No 1 (2026), DOI: https://doi.org/10.35308/jpp.v12i1.11702.
Hutchinson, T. (2018). Researching and writing in law (4th ed.). Thomson Reuters.
Ibn Rushd. (2004). Bidāyat al-mujtahid wa nihāyat al-muqtaṣid. Dār al-Ḥadīth.
Ibn Taymiyyah. (1998). Al-Siyāsah al-shar'iyyah fī iṣlāḥ al-rā'ī wa al-ra'iyyah. Dār al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kamali, M. H. (2008). Shari'ah law: An introduction. Oneworld Publications.
Lembaga Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban (LPSK). (2022). Annual report. LPSK.
Leukfeldt, E. R. (2014). Phishing for suitable targets in the Netherlands: Routine activity theory and phishing victimization. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(8), 551-555. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0008
Leukfeldt, E. R., & Yar, M. (2016). Applying routine activity theory to cybercrime. European Journal of Criminology, 13(3), 263-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2015.1012409
Mitnick, K. D., & Simon, W. L. (2011). The art of deception: Controlling the human element of security. Wiley.
Muladi, & Arief, B. N. (2010). Teori-teori dan kebijakan pidana. Alumni.
OECD. (2020). Digital security risk management: A strategic approach. OECD Publishing.
Susanto, H. (2022). Cyber law enforcement challenges in Indonesia. Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies, 7(2), 145-162.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). (2013). Comprehensive study on cybercrime. United Nations.
Verizon. (2023). 2023 data breach investigations report. Verizon Enterprise.
Wall, D. S. (2007). Cybercrime: The transformation of crime in the information age. Polity Press.
Yar, M. (2013). Cybercrime and society (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An introduction to comparative law (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Law and Society

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

