The judicious use of electronic evidence (interception) in the Anti-Corruption Criminal Law holds significant legal implications. Employing normative legal research methodology, this study explores the judicial implications of electronic surveillance evidence within the framework of Indonesia's Telecommunications Law and the Law on Information and Electronic Transactions. Despite legislative recognition of electronic surveillance recordings as admissible evidence, their probative value remains contingent upon judicial interpretation. While the law acknowledges electronic surveillance as a crime, it also upholds the right to privacy and communication. Hence, the legal categorization of electronic evidence as indicative rather than conclusive underscores the need for a nuanced approach in its judicial application. The study suggests revisiting the legal provisions governing electronic evidence, particularly in the context of combating extraordinary crimes like corruption. Moreover, it advocates for aligning the treatment of electronic evidence with established principles within the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) to ensure its proper adjudication. By delineating the nature and character of electronic evidence within the legal framework, this research underscores the importance of a comprehensive understanding to prevent misinterpretation and ensure effective enforcement.