Reformulating The Meaning of “May Result In Loss” In The Criminal Offense of Forgery: Toward Legal Certainty In Indonesian Criminal Law

Modern criminal law increasingly employs preventive mechanisms to protect legally recognized interests before harm actually occurs. This approach is reflected in the offense of document forgery, for which Indonesian criminal law uses the phrase “may result in loss.” Although this formulation allows criminal liability to be considered without proof of completed loss, it raises questions about the threshold at which a risk becomes legally relevant. The absence of express criteria may create uncertainty concerning the nature of the offense, the assessment of evidence, and the scope of criminalization. This study examines the normative construction of the phrase “may result in loss,” identifies the legal boundaries between actual and potential loss, and proposes a formulation intended to strengthen legal certainty. It employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, historical, and comparative approaches, with a limited case-law analysis. Legal materials are examined through grammatical, systematic, and teleological interpretation. The study finds that potential loss may satisfy the statutory element even where actual loss has not materialized, but a merely abstract or speculative possibility should not suffice. The phrase should be interpreted by reference to (1) an identifiable legally protected interest, (2) a sufficiently direct and relevant connection between the use of the forged document and the alleged risk, (3) concrete circumstances supporting the risk, and (4) a reasonable, objectively explainable likelihood of loss that can be tested against admissible evidence. These criteria are proposed as interpretive parameters to guide adjudication and legislative development, rather than as requirements already expressly stated in the statute. They are intended to promote consistency, uphold the principle of lex certa, and reduce the risk of overcriminalization.