State Digital Sovereignty in the Regulation of Global Social Media Platforms
Keywords:
Digital Sovereignty, Social Media, Digital Regulation, State, Cyber LawAbstract
The globalization of digital space and the dominance of global social media platforms have created new challenges for states in maintaining sovereignty in cyberspace. Communication activities, information distribution, and the management of citizens’ data now largely take place on cross-border platforms controlled by global corporations. This situation raises questions regarding the limits of state authority in regulating social media platforms and its implications for freedom of expression, data protection, and national interests. This study employs a normative juridical approach by examining Indonesian legislation, principles of international law, and the doctrine of digital sovereignty. The findings show that state digital sovereignty represents an adaptation of the classical concept of sovereignty, emphasizing the state’s authority to regulate digital activities that affect its citizens and the public interest. The regulation of global social media platforms has a dual implication: it strengthens the protection of national interests while at the same time potentially restricting freedom of expression if not implemented proportionally. In addition, the strengthening of digital sovereignty poses the risk of internet fragmentation if it is not accompanied by a harmonious approach aligned with the principles of global openness. Therefore, a model of digital sovereignty regulation is required that balances state authority, the protection of human rights, and the need for international cooperation in order to build a fair and sustainable digital governance framework.
References
[1] Petrenj, B., Piraina, M., Feletti, G., & Trucco, P. (2023). Information-Sharing in Cross-border Critical Infrastructure Resilience: evaluating the benefits of a digital platform.
[2] Loonam, J., & O'Regan, N. (2022). Global value chains and digital platforms: Implications for strategy. Strategic Change, 31(1), 161-177.
[3] Staab, P., & Thiel, T. (2022). Social media and the digital structural transformation of the public sphere. Theory, Culture & Society, 39(4), 129-143.
[4] Cohen, J. E. (2023). Infrastructuring the digital public sphere. Yale JL & Tech., 25, 1.
[5] Eren, İ., Aktuğlu Aktan, E. Ö., & Altanlar, A. (2024). Redefining public space: The evolution of meaning in the digital era. In Proceedings of The International Conference on Research in Social Sciences (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-13).
[6] Jhaver, S., Frey, S., & Zhang, A. X. (2023). Decentralizing platform power: A design space of multi-level governance in online social platforms. Social Media+ Society, 9(4), 20563051231207857.
[7] Nitzberg, M., & Zysman, J. (2022). Algorithms, data, and platforms: the diverse challenges of governing AI. Journal of European Public Policy, 29(11), 1753-1778.
[8] Yu, K., Malik, N. S., & Yang, T. (2023). The legal issue of deterrence of algorithmic control of digital platforms: the experience of China, the European union, Russia and India. Brics Law Journal, 10(1), 147-170.
[9] Afzal, J. (2024). Digital Law Enforcement Challenges and Improvement. In Implementation of Digital Law as a Legal Tool in the Current Digital Era (pp. 47-78). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
[10] Núñez, J. E. (2024). State sovereignty: Concept and conceptions. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 37(7), 2131-2150.
[11] Pierucci, F. (2025). Sovereignty in the Digital Era: Rethinking Territoriality and Governance in Cyberspace. Digital Society, 4(1), 1-19..
[12] Kaya, M., & Shahid, H. (2025). Cross-Border Data Flows and Digital Sovereignty: Legal Dilemmas in Transnational Governance. Interdisciplinary Studies in Society, Law, and Politics, 4(2), 219-233.
[13] Chander, A., & Sun, H. (2022). Sovereignty 2.0. Vand. J. Transnat'l L., 55, 283.
[14] Rahman, H. A., Karunakaran, A., & Cameron, L. D. (2024). Taming platform power: Taking accountability into account in the management of platforms. Academy of Management Annals, 18(1), 251-294.
[15] Gandini, A., Keeling, S., & Reviglio, U. (2025). Conceptualising the ‘algorithmic public opinion’: Public opinion formation in the digital age. Dialogues on Digital Society, 29768640251323147.
[16] Gu, H. (2024). Data, big tech, and the new concept of sovereignty. Journal of Chinese political science, 29(4), 591-612.
[17] Chen, L., Chen, J., & Xia, C. (2022). Social network behavior and public opinion manipulation. Journal of Information Security and Applications, 64, 103060.
[18] Khadzhiradieva, S., Bezverkhniuk, B., Nazarenko, O., Bazyka, S., & Dotsenko, T. (2024). Personal data protection: Between human rights protection and national security. Social and Legal Studios, 3(7), 245-256.
[19] Common, M. F. (2023). Beyond the usual suspects: a taxonomy of social media regulations in countries with human rights issues. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 37(1), 1-28.
[20] Ayansola, P. O. (2024). The Permissibility of Restriction of Access to Social Media Platforms: A Study of States’ Regulatory Control over Social Media Platforms in Africa.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Hukum Siber dan Regulasi Teknologi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
