Crossmark

CYBERSECURITY GOVERNANCE IN ELECTRONIC-BASED GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS: AN ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENT’S LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC DATA BREACHES

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69916/jkbti.v4i3.462

Keywords:

administrative responsibility, cybersecurity governance, electronic-based government system, public data breach, public data protection

Abstract

The increasing digitalisation of public administration has made cybersecurity governance a central issue in electronic-based government systems. Public data breaches in government digital platforms are no longer merely technical incidents, but also raise questions of administrative responsibility, public service continuity, and citizens’ legal protection. This study examines the government’s legal responsibility for public data breaches within the framework of cybersecurity governance and electronic-based government systems. Using a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and analytical approaches, this article analyses cybersecurity as part of the state’s duty to provide secure, reliable, and accountable digital public services. The findings show that government responsibility can be constructed through three layers: preventive responsibility, responsive responsibility, and restorative responsibility. Preventive responsibility requires risk-based cybersecurity standards, institutional coordination, security audits, and adequate backup systems. Responsive responsibility requires rapid incident detection, containment, reporting, and transparent public communication. Restorative responsibility requires service recovery, breach notification, institutional evaluation, and remedies for affected citizens. The novelty of this study lies in integrating cybersecurity governance, electronic-based government systems, and administrative-law responsibility into a single analytical framework. The study argues that public data protection is not only a technical obligation, but also a legal manifestation of due care, accountability, good administration, and public service responsibility. Therefore, cybersecurity governance must be positioned as an essential requirement for lawful, secure, and citizen-centred digital government.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

D. Ribeiro, J. Fonte, and L. Antunes, “Assessing the information security posture of online public services worldwide: Technical insights, trends and policy implications,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 3, Art. no. 102031, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102031.

S. Hamid and M. N. Huda, “Mapping the landscape of government data breaches: A bibliometric analysis of literature from 2006 to 2023,” Social Sciences & Humanities Open, vol. 11, Art. no. 101234, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101234.

S. Mushtaq and M. Shah, “Mitigating cybercrimes in e-government services: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis,” Digital, vol. 5, no. 1, Art. no. 3, 2025, doi: 10.3390/digital5010003.

S. T. Hossain, T. Yigitcanlar, K. Nguyen, and Y. Xu, “Cybersecurity in local governments: A systematic review and framework of key challenges,” Urban Governance, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ugj.2024.12.010.

L. Magnusson, S. Iqbal, and F. Dalipi, “Information security governance in the public sector: Investigations, approaches, measures, and trends,” International Journal of Information Security, vol. 24, Art. no. 177, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10207-025-01097-x.

V. Figueroa, L. E. Sánchez Crespo, A. Santos-Olmo, D. G. Rosado, and E. Fernández-Medina, “Building a holistic cybersecurity framework for e-Government based on a systematic analysis of proposals,” International Journal of Information Security, vol. 24, Art. no. 121, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10207-025-01024-0.

A. Nguyen-Duc, M. V. Do, Q. L. Hong, K. N. Khac, and A. N. Quang, “On the adoption of static analysis for software security assessment: A case study of an open-source e-government project,” Computers & Security, vol. 111, Art. no. 102470, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2021.102470.

S. T. Hossain, T. Yigitcanlar, K. Nguyen, and Y. Xu, “Understanding local government cybersecurity policy: A concept map and framework,” Information, vol. 15, no. 6, Art. no. 342, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/info15060342.

S. T. Hossain, T. Yigitcanlar, K. Nguyen, and Y. Xu, “Local government cybersecurity landscape: A systematic review and conceptual framework,” Applied Sciences, vol. 14, no. 13, Art. no. 5501, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135501.

F. Cremer, B. Sheehan, M. Fortmann, A. N. Kia, M. Mullins, F. Murphy, and S. Materne, “Cyber risk and cybersecurity: A systematic review of data availability,” The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance—Issues and Practice, vol. 47, pp. 698–736, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41288-022-00266-6.

W. W. Li, A. C. M. Leung, and W. T. Yue, “Where is IT in information security? The interrelationship among IT investment, security awareness, and data breaches,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 317–342, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2022/15713.

M. Prictor, “Data breach notification laws—Momentum across the Asia-Pacific region,” Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1–7, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-023-10324-w.

M. F. R. Ba’abud and D. S. N. Heriyanto, “Application of the principles of extraterritorial jurisdiction towards personal data breach committed cross-country borders,” Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 106–137, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.22437/up.v5i1.28300.

S. Poli and E. Sommario, “The rationale and the perils of failing to invoke state responsibility for cyber-attacks: The case of the EU cyber sanctions,” German Law Journal, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 522–536, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.25.

M. J. Ahn and Y.-C. Chen, “Digital transformation toward AI-augmented public administration: The perception of government employees and the willingness to use AI in government,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 2, Art. no. 101664, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101664.

C. van Noordt and G. Misuraca, “Artificial intelligence for the public sector: Results of landscaping the use of AI in government across the European Union,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 3, Art. no. 101714, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101714.

E. Ruijer, “Designing and implementing data collaboratives: A governance perspective,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 4, Art. no. 101612, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101612.

M. Gasco-Hernandez, J. R. Gil-Garcia, and L. F. Luna-Reyes, “Unpacking the role of technology, leadership, governance and collaborative capacities in inter-agency collaborations,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 3, Art. no. 101710, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101710.

S. Wouters, M. Janssen, V. Lember, and J. Crompvoets, “Strategies to advance the dream of integrated digital public service delivery in inter-organizational collaboration networks,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 40, no. 1, Art. no. 101779, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101779.

S. K. Sharma, B. Metri, Y. K. Dwivedi, and N. P. Rana, “Challenges common service centers face in delivering e-government services in rural India,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 2, Art. no. 101573, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101573.

S. Malodia, A. Dhir, M. Mishra, and Z. A. Bhatti, “Future of e-government: An integrated conceptual framework,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 173, Art. no. 121102, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121102.

R. Kumar, A. Mukherjee, and A. Sachan, “Factors influencing indirect adoption of e-Government services: A qualitative study,” Information Systems and e-Business Management, vol. 21, pp. 471–504, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-023-00637-z.

I. Savveli, M. Rigou, and S. Balaskas, “From e-government to AI e-government: A systematic review of citizen attitudes,” Informatics, vol. 12, no. 3, Art. no. 98, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics12030098.

T. Haesevoets, B. Verschuere, R. Van Severen, and A. Roets, “How do citizens perceive the use of artificial intelligence in public sector decisions?,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 1, Art. no. 101906, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101906.

P. Mikalef, K. Lemmer, C. Schaefer, M. Ylinen, S. O. Fjørtoft, H. Y. Torvatn, M. Gupta, and B. Niehaves, “Enabling AI capabilities in government agencies: A study of determinants for European municipalities,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 4, Art. no. 101596, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101596.

Downloads

Published

2025-09-28

PlumX Metrics

Scite Metrics

Altmetric

How to Cite

[1]
Erfan Wahyudi and Muhammad Suhardi, “CYBERSECURITY GOVERNANCE IN ELECTRONIC-BASED GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS: AN ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENT’S LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC DATA BREACHES”, JKBTI, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 303–311, Sep. 2025.

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 3 (2025): September 2025

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Erfan Wahyudi, Muhammad Suhardi

Creative Commons License

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

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC