Advances in blockchain technology have given rise to various forms of digital assets, including crypto assets and tokenized assets representing particular rights and economic interests, thereby creating new challenges for Indonesia's civil-law system. This study examines whether Indonesian civil-law constructs can accommodate crypto-asset developments by comparing regulatory approaches in several jurisdictions. It employs normative legal research using statutory and conceptual approaches, supported by an analysis of legislation, doctrine, and legal literature. The findings show that the United States, Japan, and Singapore apply regulatory approaches based on the functions and economic characteristics of crypto assets, whereas Indonesia continues to regulate them only partially through Bappebti regulations and Law Number 4 of 2023 on Financial Sector Development and Strengthening, which focus on financial-sector supervision. Although Article 499 of the Indonesian Civil Code permits tokenized assets to be classified as intangible property, legal certainty is still lacking regarding their civil-law status, mechanisms for transferring rights, inheritance, and the protection of property rights. Accordingly, legislation at the level of an Act is needed to integrate civil law, financial-sector regulation, and the legal regimes governing underlying assets, thereby ensuring legal certainty while supporting digital-asset innovation in Indonesia.

This article examines integrated-assessment-based rehabilitative diversion for narcotics users through proportional sentencing, differentiation of personal users from traffickers, recovery-oriented sanctions, and safeguards against misuse of diversion. It uses normative legal research and a structured analysis of applicable legal materials, supported by comparative and interdisciplinary scholarship where relevant. The revised analysis distinguishes legal design from empirical claims and identifies the principal regulatory or institutional gap. The study finds that existing law provides important but fragmented safeguards and that legal certainty depends on clearer decision criteria, procedural accountability, and proportionate remedies. It proposes an operational framework that specifies legal thresholds, institutional responsibilities, safeguards, and review mechanisms. The article contributes a more explicit research gap, a reproducible doctrinal method, and a policy model calibrated to legality, proportionality, accountability, and rights protection.

Supreme Court Decision Number 1130 K/Pdt/2017 represents an important point in resolving the tension between the patrilineal customary law of the Manggarai community and the principle of equality in Indonesian national law. This study aims to analyse the position of patrilineal customary law within the national legal system, women’s inheritance rights from the perspectives of jurisprudence and human rights, and the judges’ reasoning in correcting custom-based discrimination. The method employed is normative juridical research using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. Primary legal materials comprise Supreme Court Decision Number 1130 K/Pdt/2017, the 1945 Constitution, Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights, and related jurisprudence, while secondary legal materials consist of legal literature, scholarly journals, and books. Data were collected through library research, and analysed using legal interpretation and legal argumentation. The findings show that patrilineal customary law which does not recognise women’s inheritance rights is deemed contrary to Article 27 of the 1945 Constitution and to Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights. The Supreme Court has consistently continued the jurisprudence established since Decision Number 179 K/SIP/1961, which equated the inheritance rights of women and men. This study is not the first of its kind, but it offers an analytical contribution by reading the decision as a point at which three legal operations converge  constitutional equality, the conditional recognition afforded by Article 18B paragraph (2), and the authority of Supreme Court jurisprudence and by separating the three in argumentative terms.

This study examines the legal qualification of mortgage creditors as bona fide third parties in the confiscation of assets related to corruption and evaluates the legal certainty of their protection. It employs normative legal research using statutory and conceptual approaches. The analysis focuses on the Mortgage Law, the Anti-Corruption Law, Supreme Court Regulation Number 2 of 2022, the United Nations Convention against Corruption, and the principles of legal certainty, justice, and utility. The study finds that a mortgage creditor may qualify as a third party because the creditor holds an independent registered security right and stands outside the offender's criminal liability. Good faith requires more than a valid Mortgage Certificate; it also depends on a genuine credit transaction, lawful registration, prudent examination of the collateral, reasonable timing and value, and the absence of knowledge or involvement in the offence. Existing law provides a substantive basis for protection but remains procedurally uncertain because Supreme Court Regulation Number 2 of 2022 does not expressly include mortgage creditors among eligible applicants. Legal certainty therefore requires explicit procedural standing, adequate notice, balanced evidentiary burdens, and a clear remedy, such as preserving the mortgage, separating the secured amount from sale proceeds, or paying the verified outstanding debt before the remainder is recovered by the state.

This article examines automated marketplace decisions that reduce product rankings or restrict merchant accounts through procedural fairness, explainability, human review, and legal remedies for merchants affected by automated platform governance. It uses normative legal research and a structured analysis of applicable legal materials, supported by comparative and interdisciplinary scholarship where relevant. The revised analysis distinguishes legal design from empirical claims and identifies the principal regulatory or institutional gap. The study finds that existing law provides important but fragmented safeguards and that legal certainty depends on clearer decision criteria, procedural accountability, and proportionate remedies. It proposes an operational framework that specifies legal thresholds, institutional responsibilities, safeguards, and review mechanisms. The article contributes a more explicit research gap, a reproducible doctrinal method, and a policy model calibrated to legality, proportionality, accountability, and rights protection.

This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of alternative methods in resolving labor disputes between employees and employers. The issue addressed is the continued dominance of litigation, which tends to be time-consuming, costly, and less likely to produce mutually beneficial solutions. Therefore, this research focuses on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods, such as mediation, conciliation, and arbitration, as more effective and equitable mechanisms for dispute settlement. The research employs a normative juridical approach with qualitative analysis, utilizing secondary data in the form of laws and regulations, legal literature, and previous studies relevant to labor dispute resolution. The analysis is conducted descriptively and analytically to examine the effectiveness and implementation of ADR in Indonesia. The findings indicate that ADR methods, particularly mediation, play an important role in resolving labor disputes more quickly, flexibly, and in a manner that promotes mutually beneficial outcomes. However, their effectiveness still faces several challenges, including limited mediator competence, lack of understanding among the parties, and certain regulatory obstacles. In conclusion, ADR constitutes an important instrument for resolving labor disputes outside the court system; however, it requires stronger regulatory support, enhanced mediator capacity, and broader public awareness among the parties in order to ensure optimal legal certainty and justice.

This study aims to clarify the legal position of severance pay following the post-Job-Creation-Law reforms in Indonesia, specifically examining its relationship with civil damages. The central proposition is that severance pay constitutes statutory compensation arising ex lege under employment legislation, and is not, by itself, a form of damages for breach of contract. A lawful termination of employment may still trigger an obligation for statutory severance or other compensation depending on the legally specified grounds. Conversely, an unlawful or contractually wrongful termination may raise separate legal questions concerning the restoration of workers' rights or civil damages, provided that their specific legal elements are proven. This study employs a normative legal research methodology, utilizing statutory, conceptual, and case approaches to analyze the Indonesian Civil Code, employment legislation read alongside Law Number 6 of 2023, Government Regulation Number 35 of 2021, and selected industrial relations decisions. The analysis concludes that employment law fundamentally serves as the lex specialis starting point. Civil Code Articles 1243 and 1365 may operate only subsidiarily where a genuine normative gap or a separate civil wrong exists, and where loss, causation, legal basis, and jurisdiction are firmly established; they do not automatically enlarge the statutory severance formula.

This article examines transparency of paid product rankings on marketplace platforms through legal certainty, consumer decision-making, ranking transparency, and the boundary between commercial disclosure and protection of platform trade secrets. It uses normative legal research and a structured analysis of applicable legal materials, supported by comparative and interdisciplinary scholarship where relevant. The revised analysis distinguishes legal design from empirical claims and identifies the principal regulatory or institutional gap. The study finds that existing law provides important but fragmented safeguards and that legal certainty depends on clearer decision criteria, procedural accountability, and proportionate remedies. It proposes an operational framework that specifies legal thresholds, institutional responsibilities, safeguards, and review mechanisms. The article contributes a more explicit research gap, a reproducible doctrinal method, and a policy model calibrated to legality, proportionality, accountability, and rights protection.

The entry into force of Law Number 1 of 2023 on the Indonesian Criminal Code on 2 January 2026 places corporate criminal liability within the general architecture of national criminal law alongside pre-existing sectoral provisions. This article examines the relationship among the Criminal Code, the Criminal Adjustment Law, Articles 116-119 of the Environmental Law, and Supreme Court Regulation No. 13 of 2016. The juridical analysis separates attribution of conduct, organizational fault, individual responsibility, the relevance of administrative permits, and sanction calibration. The study argues that the Environmental Law remains a sectoral basis that must be read together with the Criminal Code's general corporate rules without converting every employee violation into corporate fault. A three-stage model conduct attribution, organizational fault, and sanction calibration is proposed as a reasoning framework that still requires proof of the underlying offence. Fines, disgorgement, restoration, compliance reform, and activity restrictions must be tied to their respective legal bases, institutional competences, and proportionality safeguards.

This article looks at how living law, customary criminal law fits into Indonesias national criminal law system. The main question is how to include criminal law without hurting the principles of legality, legal certainty and constitutional protections. A normative juridical method is used, which involves analyzing laws and court decisions. The analysis includes The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, Emergency Law Number 1 of 1951, Law Number 48 of 2009 on Judicial Power, Law Number 1 of 2023 on the National Criminal Code, Relevant court decisions, The study finds that customary criminal law is a source of unwritten law. It is recognized when it reflects norms that're still alive accepted and obeyed by customary communities. However its use must align with Pancasila, human rights, proportionality and the rule of law. Judges play a role in deciding if customary settlements can affect prosecution, sentencing or preventing double punishment. at the end living law that comes from indigenous peoples should be seen as a controlled expansion of law sources, guided by the constitution. The integration of criminal law requires careful consideration to ensure it works with the existing legal system. This means balancing law with national laws and constitutional protections. The role of judges is crucial, in making this balance work.

This article examines the need to prohibit manipulative political deepfakes in Indonesian election campaigns and formulates a regulatory model aligned with the principles of honest and fair elections. This normative legal research uses statutory, conceptual, and case approaches to analyze existing regulatory gaps. The results indicate that current legal instruments, such as the Election Law, the Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE) Law, and electoral management body regulations, remain partial. These regulations lack specific operational mechanisms to address artificial intelligence (AI)-based identity manipulation that significantly threatens electoral integrity and voter autonomy. As an implication and answer to these issues, this study proposes a more proportionate legal framework. The proposed model includes a specific prohibition on political identity falsification, mandatory AI content labeling, rapid clarification and content removal mechanisms, and institutional coordination guidelines among the KPU, Bawaslu, Kominfo, and digital platforms. The implementation of this model strengthens legal certainty in responding to digital disinformation in a measured manner, ensuring that the purity of voter intent remains protected without suppressing freedom of expression, such as legitimate satire.

This article asks whether the discretionary rehabilitation measure for perpetrators of sexual violence under Article 17 of Indonesia’s Law Number 12 of 2022 on Sexual Violence Crimes (the TPKS Law) satisfies the doctrinal elements of an enforceable double-track sanction; if not, whether the resulting gap stems from the norm’s design or institutional capacity. Using a normative juridical method (statutory, case, and conceptual approaches on primary, secondary, and tertiary materials, without field data), the article develops a four-element doctrinal test, measure type, triggering criteria, implementing authority, and enforcement consequence, and then applies Soerjono Soekanto’s five-factor test of legal effectiveness to explain the gap. Article 17 satisfies only one element in full; the other three are absent or partial, a design defect compounded by delayed implementing regulations, national prison overcrowding of 86 to 89 percent, and the absence of a ready executor under an adjacent regime. Unlike prior studies, which describe the gap only in general terms, this article isolates Article 17 from the adjacent chemical castration regime under Government Regulation 70/2020 and supplies a testable doctrinal standard and explanatory framework, informed by a comparable implementation case from Uruguay. The resulting reform proposal, a rebuttable presumption bounded by proportionality safeguards, follows directly from the doctrinal finding and is conditioned on preserving judicial discretion and the victim-centered protections the TPKS Law already secures.

The expansion of social media as a forum for public criticism has intensified the legal tension between freedom of expression and protection of reputation in Indonesia. This study analyses the acquittals of Haris Azhar and Fatia Maulidiyanti by the East Jakarta District Court, the subsequent rejection of the prosecutor's cassation by the Supreme Court, and the relevance of recent changes to Indonesia's electronic information law. The study applies normative juridical research using statutory, case, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Primary legal materials include the 1945 Constitution, Law Number 19 of 2016, Law Number 1 of 2024, the district court and Supreme Court decisions, and Constitutional Court Decision Number 105/PUU-XXII/2024. Secondary materials include Indonesian legal scholarship and five recent Elsevier journal articles on digital speech, platform governance, content moderation, and chilling effects. The analysis finds that the judicial reasoning draws a legally significant distinction between criticism directed at public policy or public office and attacks on personal honour. The Supreme Court's cassation ruling strengthens that distinction as persuasive jurisprudence, although Indonesia does not apply stare decisis. The 2024 statutory amendment and the Constitutional Court's 2025 interpretation further narrow the legitimate reach of electronic defamation law. The study argues that restrictions on online expression should focus on demonstrable attacks on individual reputation and should not convert research-based public-interest criticism into criminal defamation. This approach provides a more coherent balance between constitutional expression, reputation, legal certainty, and democratic oversight.

This article examines law-enforcement effectiveness in securing National Vital Objects in Ambon City through allocation of institutional responsibility, risk-based security, operational capacity, and the limits of drawing empirical effectiveness conclusions from normative legal research. It uses normative legal research and a structured analysis of applicable legal materials, supported by comparative and interdisciplinary scholarship where relevant. The revised analysis distinguishes legal design from empirical claims and identifies the principal regulatory or institutional gap. The study finds that existing law provides important but fragmented safeguards and that legal certainty depends on clearer decision criteria, procedural accountability, and proportionate remedies. It proposes an operational framework that specifies legal thresholds, institutional responsibilities, safeguards, and review mechanisms. The article contributes a more explicit research gap, a reproducible doctrinal method, and a policy model calibrated to legality, proportionality, accountability, and rights protection.

This study analyses the coherence of Surakarta City’s legal framework for inclusive tourism, with an operational focus on accessibility for persons with disabilities because this dimension is supported by the clearest enforceable legal duties. The research is normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and limited comparative approaches. The principal legal materials include Law Number 10 of 2009 on Tourism, Law Number 8 of 2016 on Persons with Disabilities, Surakarta City Regulation Number 13 of 2016, Surakarta City Regulation Number 5 of 2017, Surakarta City Regulation Number 9 of 2020, and Surakarta Mayor Regulations Number 26 and Number 27 of 2024. The analysis shows that Surakarta does not face a complete regulatory vacuum: tourism regulations, disability-rights rules, tourism-area service standards, and general sanctioning mechanisms already exist. The central normative problem is fragmentation and the incomplete integration of accessibility standards with tourism-business obligations, service indicators, supervision, licensing, and cross-agency coordination. Friedman’s legal-system theory is used to assess the normative design of legal substance and legal structure, while legal culture is treated as an empirical research agenda that is not measured by this study. The article recommends harmonising existing instruments, developing measurable accessibility indicators and procedures, and strengthening coordination through a mechanism that does not duplicate the disability institutions already established.

The expansion of the video game industry in Indonesia has intensified modding as a form of digital creativity while also exposing uncertainty over the legal boundaries of copyright protection for game characters. This article examines the legal status of video game characters, the qualification of unauthorized modding under Indonesian copyright law, and the regulatory reconstruction required to address the resulting grey areas. The study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, comparative, and case approaches. Its principal legal materials include Law Number 28 of 2014 on Copyright, digital-law instruments, derivative-work doctrine, end-user licence agreements, technological protection measures, and scholarship on modding practices. The analysis finds that modding involving adaptation, transformation, public distribution, commercialization, or circumvention of technological protection measures may engage the exclusive rights of copyright holders, while private, non-commercial and non-distributive modifications remain less clearly regulated. The article develops a three-tier regulatory framework combining risk-based legal classification, institutionalized community licensing, and proportionate platform accountability. This framework is intended to protect legitimate copyright interests without eliminating socially valuable forms of participatory digital creativity.

Urban waste management at the Bantar Gebang Integrated Waste Management Site (TPST) faces various challenges in achieving sustainable development while fulfilling government responsibilities. This study analyzes the fulfillment of the environmental dimensions of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), together with the legal constraints and implications of the accountability of the Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta. The findings show that the fulfillment of the SDGs, particularly Goals 11, 12, and 13, remains suboptimal because open dumping continues to be prioritized in the waste-management process despite its prohibition under Law Number 18 of 2008. This condition has indirectly contributed to the accumulation of 55 million tons of waste, environmental pollution, and a waste landslide that killed several people in March 2026. The main obstacles to effective waste management include ambiguity in cross-jurisdictional authority between Jakarta and Bekasi, dependence on environmentally unfriendly technology, and weak administrative-law enforcement. The legal implications include non-compliance with administrative sanctions, the potential for class actions and citizen lawsuits under Law Number 32 of 2009, and the designation of the former Head of the DKI Jakarta Environmental Agency as a criminal suspect. The study concludes that government accountability remains ineffective and requires systemic and governance improvements, including source-based waste reduction, optimization of environmentally friendly technology, and stronger interregional coordination.

This article examines how educational management can be reconstructed as a governance mechanism for fulfilling and protecting students' rights within Indonesian education law, particularly following the 2026 regulatory shift toward a Safe and Comfortable School Culture. Using normative legal research, the study combines statutory and conceptual approaches. Primary legal materials include constitutional guarantees, education, child-protection, disability and personal-data legislation, as well as the latest school-management and safe-school regulations. Secondary materials comprise recent Indonesian and international peer-reviewed scholarship on education rights, inclusion, student voice, school leadership, safety and institutional accountability. The analysis finds that students' rights extend beyond formal access to schooling and encompass continuity of learning, substantive equality, physical and psychological safety, sociocultural and digital security, reasonable accommodation, meaningful participation, accessible complaints and effective remedy. The article develops a Rights-Based School Governance (RBSG) model with six interdependent dimensions: legal alignment and rights mapping; inclusive planning and equitable resource allocation; a safe and dignified learning environment; meaningful student participation; accessible complaint, response and remedy; and rights-based monitoring, evaluation and accountability. The model translates abstract legal duties into auditable managerial processes while preserving professional authority and institutional proportionality.

This article examines how educational management can operate as a governance mechanism for fulfilling and protecting students' rights within Indonesian education law following the 2026 Safe and Comfortable School Culture reform. The study uses normative legal research combining statutory and conceptual approaches with a structured purposive review of relevant scholarship. The analysis maps legal bases, duty-bearers, managerial functions, implementation mechanisms, and auditable evidence. The findings organize students' rights into access and continuity, equality, safety, reasonable accommodation, participation, and accessible complaint and remedy. From this synthesis, the article proposes a Rights-Based School Governance (RBSG) model with six parallel dimensions: legal alignment and rights mapping; inclusive planning and equitable resource allocation; a safe and dignified learning environment; meaningful student participation; accessible complaint, response and remedy; and rights-based monitoring, evaluation and accountability. The model translates legal duties into process ownership, documentary evidence, proportional safeguards, and review triggers while also recognizing procedural protection for educators. RBSG is a normative construction rather than an empirically validated intervention. Its feasibility, administrative burden, indicator validity, and effects on safety, inclusion, trust in complaint mechanisms, and continuity of learning therefore remain propositions for future multi-site empirical testing.

This article examines the integration of environmental approval into mining business licensing following the consolidation of Indonesia's risk-based licensing regime. It employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and critical policy approaches, supported by an inventory and systematic interpretation of primary legal materials and recent scholarship. The study finds that integration can improve procedural certainty, but it also produces four accountability-risk indicators: blurred separation between environmental assessment and license issuance, incomplete public decision trails, asymmetric central-regional supervisory authority, and a weak operational link between environmental violations and the status of business licenses. These risks are particularly significant in mining because ecological impacts are spatial, cumulative, and long term. The article proposes a five-stage ecological accountability framework covering pre-licensing, license issuance, supervision, sanctions, and restoration. The framework requires meaningful public participation, accessible environmental data, field verification, responsibility of permit holders and beneficial controllers, and enforceable reclamation and post-mining guarantees. The central argument is that procedural simplification is legally acceptable only when it does not become substantive deregulation of environmental control.

Continuous Voter Data Updating shifts Indonesian voter-list governance from a predominantly episodic model toward data maintenance throughout the electoral cycle. This study examines the normative position of PDPB, its functional relationship with voter-list updating during formal election stages, and its implications for protecting voting rights. The study uses normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and analytical approaches. Its principal legal materials include election legislation, KPU regulations on PDPB and voter-list preparation, population-administration law, personal-data-protection law, and Constitutional Court decisions concerning voting rights. The findings show that PDPB and election-stage updating are complementary rather than substitutive. PDPB maintains the voter database between elections, while election-stage procedures provide factual verification, correction, public scrutiny, and final legal establishment. The appropriate design is an integrated cycle linking population-data synchronization, field verification, Bawaslu oversight, public participation, and privacy safeguards. The article therefore reframes PDPB as a preventive constitutional-rights mechanism embedded in electoral governance. It also proposes an operational matrix for evaluating legal basis, institutional responsibility, verification, privacy protection, participation, and measurable performance indicators

This study examines the legal protection attached to special sovereign debt instruments in Indonesia through Patriot Bonds and Merah Putih Bonds under Article 50A of Law No. 4 of 2026 amending Law No. 4 of 2023 on Financial Sector Development and Strengthening, and compares it with Argentina’s asset-disclosure and tax-regularization regime under Law No. 27,260 of 2016, including the bond-related facilities provided within that framework. The study employs statutory financial immunity as an analytical category rather than as an established statutory classification to evaluate whether exceptional investor protection extends beyond legitimate investment certainty and materially limits ordinary criminal, civil, tax, evidentiary, or investigative mechanisms. The central issue concerns the tension between investor protection and state-financing objectives, on the one hand, and the rule of law, accountability, tax transparency, and anti-money laundering enforcement, on the other. Using a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, historical, and comparative-law approaches, the study analyzes primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials through systematic, historical, conceptual, and comparative interpretation. The findings show that the Indonesian framework attaches significant statutory protection directly to qualifying purchases of Patriot Bonds and Merah Putih Bonds, whereas Argentina links bond-related benefits to prior asset disclosure, fiscal regularization, eligibility requirements, and continuing compliance obligations. The comparison further demonstrates that legal protection affecting prosecution, taxation, evidentiary use of financial data, and access to information requires clear limitations, source-of-funds safeguards, and effective institutional oversight. The study concludes that the Indonesian framework may be characterized as a potential bond-based model of statutory financial immunity only where the operative legal provisions cumulatively satisfy the conceptual criteria developed in this study. Any such protection can be normatively justified only if it remains limited, conditional, proportionate, risk-based, and compatible with effective enforcement against money laundering, tax crimes, and other serious economic offences.

Capital punishment remains one of the most debated sanctions in criminal law, raising questions about enforcement effectiveness and human rights protection. Indonesia and Thailand, both retentionist states in Southeast Asia, retain the death penalty despite differing regulatory characteristics and reform trajectories. This study analyzes convergence and divergence in capital punishment regulation between the two jurisdictions and examines implications for criminal law reform in Southeast Asia. Using a normative comparative legal method combining statutory, conceptual, and functional approaches, the study draws on primary legal materials, including legislation and international instruments such as the ICCPR and its Second Optional Protocol, alongside Scopus-indexed literature. Findings show both countries converge in retaining capital punishment for serious offenses, particularly premeditated murder and drug crimes, yet diverge in reform models. Indonesia's 2023 Criminal Code introduces a conditional death penalty with a ten-year probationary mechanism permitting commutation, while Thailand pursues a restrictive model narrowing death-eligible offenses and regulating execution procedures. Neither state has ratified the Second Optional Protocol; reform reflects domestic accommodation of ICCPR Article 6 rather than treaty-mandated abolition. Applying Nelken's theory of legal divergence, the study concludes that shared international pressures produce distinct, domestically mediated reform pathways rather than uniform regional convergence toward one model.

Reform of criminal procedural law through Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (New Criminal Procedure Code) brings changes to the regulation of legal action and detention. This article analyzes the limits of the public prosecutor's authority in filing appeals and cassation when the defendant's detention period has ended, from the perspective of human rights, legal certainty, proportionality and correctional overcapacity. This research uses normative juridical methods with statutory, conceptual, case and comparative approaches. The research results show that the end of the detention period does not automatically eliminate the public prosecutor's right to file legal action. However, the end of the detention period ends the previous basis for detention, so that detention at the appeal or cassation stage must be based on new authority and determinations in accordance with the New Criminal Procedure Code. Detention without a valid legal basis has the potential to violate the right to freedom and legal certainty. Specifically for acquittal decisions, defendants who are still detained must be released from the moment the decision is pronounced and an acquittal decision cannot be challenged by cassation. Therefore, it is necessary to harmonize norms and strengthen judicial supervision so that legal measures are not misused as a means of maintaining detention and to guarantee the protection of human rights.

The blue economy is a development paradigm that emphasizes the sustainable use of marine resources by paying attention to ecological, social and economic aspects. Indonesia as a maritime country has great potential to develop a blue economy, but its implementation still faces various obstacles, both from a regulatory and institutional perspective. This article aims to analyze the strengthening of the blue economy law through the role of the Red and White Village/Subdistrict Cooperative as a forum for the people's economy. The research method used is a juridical-normative approach by examining related laws and regulations, legal doctrine, and cooperative institutional construction. The results of the analysis show that the Red and White Village/Subdistrict Cooperative normatively has the potential as an institutional instrument in supporting the blue economy through the function of organizing community businesses, strengthening the marine economic value chain, distributing economic benefits, and empowering coastal communities. However, the legal framework that regulates the relationship between cooperative law, maritime law and the principles of environmental sustainability still shows a fragmentation of norms so that harmonization of regulations and strengthening of sectoral policies is needed. The conclusions of this research are limited to a normative analysis of the legal design and institutional potential of cooperatives, not to measuring the actual effectiveness of cooperatives as blue economy actors because they have not been supported by empirical testing of institutional performance, governance capacity, or economic and ecological impacts at the community level. Further research needs to be directed at empirical studies regarding the effectiveness of the Red and White Village/Kelurahan Cooperatives in blue economy practices, including aspects of governance, access to financing, supply chains, environmental compliance, and their contribution to improving the welfare of coastal communities.

This article examines the tension between legal pluralism and deregulation in Indonesia’s customary forest recognition framework, focusing on the persistence of layered administrative requirements for rights that are constitutionally acknowledged. The study employs a juridical approach combining statutory, conceptual, and case analyses. It examines the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, Law Number 41 of 1999 on Forestry, the post-Job Creation regulatory framework, and Constitutional Court Decision Number 35/PUU-X/2012. The analysis finds a regulatory asymmetry: deregulation has simplified and accelerated business access to forest-related resources, while customary forest recognition remains dependent on prior recognition of indigenous legal communities and, in particular regulatory configurations, regional legal instruments. This dependency transforms recognition that should be declaratory into a procedure resembling constitutive state authorization. The article proposes a declaratory recognition model based on registration and legal verification, time-bound administrative decisions, interim protection for claimed territories under review, integrated participatory mapping, and an objection mechanism for third parties. Under this model, the state confirms a pre-existing legal status rather than creating the underlying customary right. Such reconstruction would align legal certainty with constitutional recognition, reduce procedural inequality, preserve safeguards against overlapping claims, and make deregulation compatible with legal pluralism and ecological justice.

This study examines the discourse surrounding the proposed increase in Indonesia’s state budget (APBN) deficit beyond the statutory ceiling of 3% of GDP through a Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu). The research is motivated by intensifying global economic pressures arising from geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, particularly disruptions to global energy supply chains that may significantly affect Indonesia as a net oil-importing country. Nevertheless, this study argues that external shocks alone do not account for fiscal deficit pressures, as internal fiscal inefficiencies and policy choices may also contribute to the deterioration of the fiscal position. From a constitutional and legal perspective, the proposed policy must be assessed against Law No. 17 of 2003 on State Finance and Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution, as interpreted by Constitutional Court Decision No. 138/PUU-VII/2009, which establishes the constitutional parameters for the issuance of a Perppu based on the existence of a “compelling urgency.” This research employs a normative juridical method complemented by statistical analysis of global oil price movements, fiscal deficit developments, and capital outflow indicators. The analysis focuses on whether the proposed expansion of the deficit ceiling is attributable exclusively to external economic shocks and whether the issuance of a Perppu satisfies the constitutional requirements of a “compelling urgency.” The study argues that the proposed policy may not fully satisfy this constitutional criterion because a portion of the fiscal pressure derives from internally generated inefficiencies, creating what may be characterized as a form of “self-inflicted urgency.” Accordingly, mechanisms provided under the existing budgetary framework, particularly an amendment to the APBN (APBN-P), may constitute a more constitutionally appropriate and procedurally accountable alternative to the issuance of a Perppu.

Non-ASN lecturers play a substantive role in higher education by carrying out teaching, research, community service, academic supervision, and scientific development. However, their academic obligations are not always followed by adequate legal protection of income and welfare. This article examines the position of academic welfare for non-ASN lecturers within the framework of the welfare state and formulates a new direction of state responsibility in ensuring decent income in higher education. This study uses normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and policy approaches. The findings show that academic welfare is not merely an internal employment issue between lecturers and higher education institutions, but a legal issue connected to the public function of higher education, university autonomy, and the constitutional mandate of the state. Academic welfare should be understood as a minimum protection framework that enables lecturers to perform the tridharma of higher education with dignity, productivity, and sustainability. The state’s responsibility must therefore be directed toward establishing minimum income standards, ensuring social protection, clarifying legal status, integrating lecturer welfare into higher education funding policy, and placing academic welfare as part of higher education quality assurance.

This study analyzes how career women manage dual roles to maintain family resilience and examines those experiences through Islamic law (Maqashid Sharia) and Indonesian positive law. The case study focuses on married female employees at STAI As-Sunnah Deli Serdang. Data were obtained through in-depth interviews, observation, and institutional documents and were analyzed using the Miles and Huberman interactive model, with triangulation across available sources. The findings indicate that family resilience is supported by participatory spousal cooperation (ta'awun), support from extended family or domestic assistance, and flexible priority management. From a Maqashid Sharia perspective, paid work may support hifz al-din, hifz al-'aql, and hifz al-mal, while pressures arising from workload and caregiving require attention to hifz al-nafs and hifz al-nasl. The legal review also shows that the reported internal practice of 30 days of maternity leave should not be assessed solely under Article 82 of Law No. 13 of 2003. The current framework includes Law No. 4 of 2024 on Maternal and Child Welfare, which provides a maternity-leave entitlement of at least three months and allows an additional period in specified conditions. Because the manuscript does not include the institution's final formal policy document or complete employment-status data, a definitive finding of institutional non-compliance requires documentary verification.