Publication Search

This study aims to gain an in-depth understanding of the legal reasoning used by judges in the Administrative Court (PTUN) in annulling State Administrative Decisions (KTUN), as well as to examine the legal implications for the parties involved and the overall system of government administration. This research employs a normative juridical method with three approaches: statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The analysis was conducted qualitatively by studying reference books and reviewing court decisions. The study shows that the annulment of KTUN by PTUN judges is based on three important factors, namely lack of authority (ultra vires), procedural defects, and substantive defects in the decision. In addition, violations of the General Principles of Good Governance (AUPB), such as the principles of legal certainty, prudence, and proportionality, also constitute important considerations for judges. In the judicial process, judges not only consider the formal aspects of the law, but also take into account substantive justice in order to protect citizens’ rights from improper governmental actions. The implications of the annulment of KTUN include the restoration of the plaintiff’s rights through the process of restitutio in integrum, the obligation of administrative officials to revoke or correct the issued decision, as well as the potential impact on third parties involved in the decision. In general, the annulment of KTUN serves as a legal control mechanism over government administration while also encouraging the realization of good and transparent governance within a state governed by the rule of law.

Child marriage remains a significant issue in legal practice in Indonesia, despite the establishment of a minimum age requirement under Law Number 16 of 2019. In practice, the mechanism of marriage dispensation is often utilized without fulfilling the standard of “urgent reasons” as required by statutory regulations. This study aims to analyze the meaning of “urgent reasons” in granting marriage dispensation and to examine the judge’s considerations in Decision Number 442/Pdt.P/2023/PA.Krw based on Supreme Court Regulation Number 5 of 2019. This research is a normative legal study employing statutory and case approaches. Legal materials were obtained through library research and analyzed using a descriptive qualitative method with a deductive approach. The findings conclude that “urgent reasons” should be interpreted strictly as real and objectively verifiable emergency circumstances. However, in the decision, the judge granted the application without clear emergency conditions, relying instead on the prospective husband’s financial readiness and the child’s status as mukallaf. This indicates a discrepancy between legal norms and judicial practice, as well as the suboptimal application of the principle of the best interests of the child.

The acceptance of family witnesses in divorce cases resulting from violations of taklik talak remains a subject of legal debate within the Indonesian Religious Courts. This debate arises from the normative tension between Article 145 of the Het Herziene Indonesisch Reglement (HIR), which restricts testimony from family members, and the need to uncover material truth in private domestic disputes, particularly in default judgments where the defendant fails to appear before the court. This study aims to analyze the legal basis underlying judges’ considerations in accepting family witnesses in divorce cases caused by violations of taklik talak, using Decision Number 32/Pdt.G/2017/PA.Pkl as a case study. The research employs a normative juridical approach with a descriptive-analytical method. Data were collected through library research and document analysis of relevant court decisions. The analysis links legal facts with procedural law in religious courts, the theory of rechtsvinding, and the concept of substantive justice. The findings indicate that the acceptance of family witnesses can be legally justified based on Article 76 of Law Number 7 of 1989 concerning Religious Courts as a lex specialis provision, the judges’ authority to conduct legal discovery under Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power, and principles of ushul fiqh and fiqhiyyah that support the realization of substantive justice. This study offers a reconstruction of the juridical legitimacy of family witness acceptance through the integration of positive law and Islamic law to strengthen legal certainty in religious court practices.

This study aims to analyze the factors causing children to become involved in narcotics abuse, the judges’ considerations in delivering verdicts, and the conformity of such decisions with applicable legal provisions. This research employs a normative juridical method with a descriptive-analytical approach, based on literature review and analysis of Decision Number 3/Pid.Sus-Anak/2021/PN Bnt. The results indicate that children’s involvement in narcotics-related crimes is influenced by multidimensional factors, namely economic, environmental, and legal factors. Economic factors include family financial pressure; environmental factors involve peer influence and lack of parental supervision; while legal factors relate to limited understanding of legal consequences. Judges’ considerations in rendering decisions are not only based on juridical aspects but also take into account the social and psychological conditions of the child. However, the imposition of imprisonment is considered not fully aligned with the principles of restorative justice and child protection. Therefore, it is necessary to optimize the implementation of diversion and non-penal approaches in the juvenile justice system.  

Legal disputes involving simultaneous criminal and civil dimensions often raise complex juridical issues, particularly in the context of business transactions. One relevant concept to address this issue is the prejudiciel geschill, a doctrine originating from Dutch law that regulates pre-judicial disputes as a condition for the suspension of criminal proceedings. This study aims to analyze the dispute resolution mechanism of prejudiciel geschill in criminal fraud cases and breach of contract, as well as to examine the judges' considerations in Civil Decision Number 1075/Pdt.G/2019/PN Sby and Criminal Decision Number 2482/Pid.B/2020/PN Sby. The research method used is normative juridical with a statutory and case approach. The results indicate that the application of prejudiciel geschill in both decisions reflects the interplay between civil and criminal judgments in the Indonesian judicial system. The Panel of Judges of the Surabaya District Court applied Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 1956 and SEMA Number 4 of 1980 as the basis for suspending criminal proceedings pending the final civil court decision. The study concludes that the concept of prejudiciel geschill plays a strategic role in preventing jurisdictional overlaps and ensuring legal certainty. A more comprehensive statutory regulation within national criminal procedural law is needed to accommodate the consistent application of this principle.

Citizen Lawsuit (CLS) is a legal instrument through which citizens file lawsuits against the government for its negligence in fulfilling and protecting public rights. This study aims to analyze juridically the ruling in the CLS case concerning Jokowi’s diploma based on Decision Number 211/Pdt.G/2025/PN Skt. The method employed is normative legal research using both the statute approach and the case approach. Primary legal materials consist of court decisions, while secondary legal materials include relevant literature, journals, and legal doctrines. The findings indicate that the judges’ considerations in this case focused on the plaintiff’s legal standing and the government’s responsibility to fulfill citizens’ rights. The judges appear to have adopted a more progressive perspective in assessing state responsibility, although the implementation of the ruling still faces obstacles due to difficulties in effective enforcement. This study emphasizes the strategic role of CLS as a mechanism for monitoring public policy while also highlighting the urgency of strengthening regulations and ensuring consistency in judicial decisions to provide optimal protection of citizens’ rights.

Criminal acts of assault against children constitute a serious violation of human rights that requires optimal legal protection by the state. As legal subjects, children are entitled to security, protection from violence, and guarantees for proper growth and development, as mandated by Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, and relevant child protection legislation. This study aims to conduct a juridical analysis of the legal considerations applied by judges in Decision Number 83/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Kot concerning the criminal offense of assault committed against a child, as well as to assess their conformity with criminal law principles, child protection law, and the objectives of sentencing. This research employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, supported by primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings reveal that although the legal basis applied refers to Law Number 35 of 2014 on Child Protection, the judicial considerations have not been comprehensively formulated, as they insufficiently incorporate sociological, criminological, and child-centered protection perspectives. Consequently, the sentence imposed is relatively lenient and fails to fully reflect the objectives of punishment, particularly deterrence and sustainable protection for child victims. Therefore, strengthening the quality of judicial reasoning and ensuring the optimal application of relevant legal provisions are essential to achieve legal certainty, justice, and effective protection for children as victims of violent crimes.

The president's prerogative is a form of power inherent in the president's position as head of state. One form of this prerogative is the granting of abolition, which is the abolition of legal proceedings against a person or group of people who are or will undergo judicial proceedings. However, in its implementation, the president's authority to grant abolition is not absolute, but is limited by the applicable legal provisions and constitutional mechanisms. This study aims to analyze the limits of the president's power in exercising the prerogative in the form of abolition and review the juridical aspects that govern the procedure and its considerations. The research method used is normative juridical research with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. Data sources are obtained from relevant laws and regulations, legal literature, and scientific works. The results of the study show that the president's authority in granting abolition is regulated in Article 14 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which requires the president to pay attention to the considerations of the House of Representatives (DPR). Thus, this authority is not an absolute prerogative, but is limited by the principle of checks and balances in the Indonesian constitutional system. The conclusion of this study emphasizes that the restriction is a form of constitutional supervision over the use of presidential power to remain in line with the principles of the rule of law and constitutional democracy

Corruption is an extraordinary crime that significantly affects state stability, particularly when it involves civil servants (Aparatur Sipil Negara/ASN). Collective corruption reflects a structured pattern of organized crime within the bureaucratic system. This study aims to analyze the causative factors, modus operandi, and law enforcement constraints related to corruption committed collectively by civil servants. This research employs a normative legal method using conceptual and case approaches through the analysis of the Corruption Court Decision Number 25/Pid.Sus-TPK/2025/PN Mdn. The analysis is based on judicial considerations and legal facts revealed in the decision, which are examined through a criminological perspective. The results indicate that collective corruption by civil servants is influenced by internal and external factors reflected in judicial reasoning, including structural opportunities, weak supervision, and a permissive bureaucratic culture. The modus operandi involves hierarchical collaboration through budget manipulation, price mark-ups, and procurement fraud within the framework of participation (deelneming). Law enforcement constraints include aspects of legal substance, structure, and culture. Therefore, comprehensive legal policies are required through regulatory reform, institutional strengthening, and modernization of supervisory systems.

The rapid development of information and communication technology has led to the emergence of various forms of digital-based crimes, including the dissemination of electronic information containing online gambling content through social media. This situation poses challenges for criminal law enforcement, as the parties involved are not limited to gambling operators but also include individuals who promote and facilitate access to online gambling platforms. This study aims to examine criminal liability for perpetrators who disseminate electronic information containing gambling content and to analyze judicial considerations in sentencing, referring to the Decision of the Tanjung Karang District Court Number 823/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Tjk. The method used is normative juridical research with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Data were collected through literature studies of relevant regulations, criminal law doctrines, and court decisions, and then analyzed using a descriptive qualitative method. The results show that the elements of criminal liability are fulfilled, including the existence of a criminal act, intent, capacity to be responsible, and the absence of grounds that eliminate criminal liability. Furthermore, the panel of judges’ considerations reflect a balanced assessment between juridical and non-juridical aspects, resulting in a decision that embodies legal certainty, justice, and utility. This study is expected to contribute to the development of criminal law, particularly in addressing online gambling crimes in the digital space.

This research aims to analyze the consistency of judges' legal reasoning in deciding land ownership disputes and its implications for the fulfillment of the principle of legal certainty. The primary focus of this study is directed at Decision Number 16/PDT/2020/PT PLG, where differences in legal perception or evidentiary evaluation occurred at the appellate level. Land disputes are a crucial issue that requires legal firmness to avoid uncertainty for justice seekers. The research method used is normative legal research with a case approach and a statutory approach. Data were sourced from secondary data consisting of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, analyzed qualitatively. The results show that the consistency of the judges' reasoning in Decision Number 16/PDT/2020/PT PLG depends heavily on the accuracy of assessing evidence, particularly documentary evidence (certificates) and witness testimony. Inconsistency between factual considerations and the application of legal norms has the potential to undermine the principle of legal certainty. This study concludes that strengthening the standards of legal reasoning based on the principle of ex aequo et bono and adherence to civil procedural law is absolutely necessary so that judicial decisions do not only resolve disputes procedurally but also provide certainty of ownership rights for thelitigating parties.

This study analyzes the juridical issues related to the implementation of criminal sanctions below the statutory minimum, as reflected in Cassation Decision Number 7853/K/Pid.Sus/2024. The focus of this research centers on the tension between the rigid provisions of Article 111 paragraph (1) of Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning narcotics and the reality of judicial practice, which often deviates from these provisions. This phenomenon raises debates regarding the extent to which the principle of legality can be compromised in pursuit of justice without undermining the pillar of legal certainty within Indonesia’s criminal justice system. Using a normative legal research method with a statutory and case study approach, this study qualitatively analyzes judges’ considerations. The findings indicate that, although the policy of imposing sentences below the minimum carries the risk of creating legal uncertainty, the Supreme Court in this case reinterpreted the principle of legality. Judges tend to prioritize proportionality and substantive justice to avoid purely mechanical punishment. The study concludes that, while judicial discretion represents a concrete expression of judicial independence, such practice requires clearer normative parameters. Without explicit regulation, deviations from the statutory minimum risk widening disparities in judicial decisions. Therefore, standardized sentencing guidelines are necessary to preserve legal integrity while maintaining a sense of justice for defendants.

This study examines the regulation and implementation of Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 5 of 2019 on Guidelines for Adjudicating Marriage Dispensation Requests and its implications for child rights protection in Indonesian marriage law. Employing a normative juridical approach with statutory and conceptual analysis, the study reviews Law No. 16 of 2019, PERMA 5/2019, and Law No. 35 of 2014 through library research and descriptive-analytical methods. The findings indicate that PERMA 5/2019 provides comprehensive guidelines for judges through the best interests of the child principle, including age verification, child-friendly examinations, and expert involvement to assess health, education, psychological, and family economic aspects. Its implementation shifts the judicial paradigm toward child-centered justice. However, challenges such as socio-cultural pressures, variations in judicial competence, and limited access to experts lead to inconsistent decisions that potentially perpetuate child marriage. Key implications include strengthening children's rights to participation, education, and development, yet field practices show dispensations often rely on emergency reasons like premarital pregnancy without long-term considerations. The study recommends enhancing judicial capacity, institutional synergy, digital monitoring, and regulatory revisions to position dispensation as a limited exception, effectively preventing early marriage.

The crime of receiving stolen goods, as regulated in Article 480 of the Criminal Code (KUHP), is an offence that plays a crucial role in the continuation of the principal crime, particularly theft. Receivers provide a market for stolen goods, thereby indirectly encouraging perpetrators to continue their actions. This article aims to analyse the implementation of Article 480 of the KUHP in judicial practice, with a focus on proving the element of ‘knowing or reasonably suspecting’ that the goods purchased were obtained through criminal activity. This study uses a qualitative method with a case study approach through direct observation of a trial at the M. District Court. The observations show that the panel of judges successfully proved the defendant's guilt as a fence through a series of trial facts, such as the unreasonable purchase price, consistent testimony from the perpetrator of the theft, and the defendant's own admission that he had been suspicious. The judge's decision, which was lighter than the prosecutor's demands, also reflected considerations of substantive justice and humanity in addition to legal certainty. This study concludes that the effective enforcement of Article 480 of the Criminal Code in court plays an important role in breaking the chain of crime and providing a deterrent effect not only for the main perpetrators but also for those who participate in enjoying the proceeds of crime.

This study examines the juridical aspects of guardianship applications by parents to obtain permission to sell a minor’s inherited land and analyzes the judicial considerations in Decision Number 199/Pdt.P/2025/PN Blt. The research employs an empirical juridical method with a sociological legal approach. Primary data were collected through interviews and case documents at the Blitar District Court, while secondary data consist of statutes, doctrine, and related literature. Qualitative-descriptive analysis was applied to interpret the findings. The study reveals that the guardianship application process involves both administrative and judicial stages. Judges scrutinize material evidence and the probity of sale objectives, weighing important principles such as utility, legal certainty, fairness, and justice. Guardians are granted limited authority to sell a minor’s property only if it can be proven to be in the child's best interest and legal protections are assured. Recommendations include strengthening post-decision monitoring, enhancing legal outreach, improving procedural transparency, and ensuring comprehensive implementation.

This study examines the distortion between civil and criminal perspectives in the legal considerations (ratio decidendi) of Judex Juris in Supreme Court Decision Number 121K/Pid.Sus/2020. The decision lacks substantial criminal law considerations regarding the alleged corruption offense. Instead, the legal reasoning focuses on the fault or negligence of company directors, particularly the exception under Article 97 of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies, which embodies the Business Judgment Rule doctrine. Furthermore, these considerations are distorted by tort (onrechtmatige daad) as regulated in Article 1365 of the Civil Code juncto Article 138 paragraph (1) letter b of the Company Law. This research employs a legislative approach by analyzing various legal instruments, including the 1945 Constitution, the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Limited Liability Company Law, State-Owned Enterprises Law, Judicial Power Law, Supreme Court Law, and the Corruption Eradication Laws. A conceptual approach is also utilized to examine theoretical concepts concerning corporate crime, directors' liabilities, state losses, tort, negligence from criminal and civil perspectives, business judgment rules, collective collegiality principles, and formal-material classification of legislation. The data comprises primary legal materials (legislation and court decisions) and secondary legal materials (legal literature and scientific journals). Analysis is conducted qualitatively by interpreting legal principles and their relevance to the court's considerations in the decision.

This study discusses the judge’s considerations in granting child custody of a non-mumayyiz (underage) child to the biological father in the Religious Court Decision of Tanjung Karang Number: 1379/Pdt.G/2024/PA.Tnk. Generally, according to Islamic law and the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), custody of a non-mumayyiz child is granted to the biological mother. However, in this case, the panel of judges decided to grant custody to the biological father. The purpose of this research is to identify the legal reasoning behind the judge’s decision and the legal implications of such a ruling. The study employs a normative juridical method with a descriptive-analytical approach, supported by primary data obtained through interviews and secondary data from legislation and legal literature. The results show that the judge’s consideration was based on the best interest of the child principle, as the mother had remarried a non-Muslim man and converted to another religion, which made her ineligible to be the custodian under Islamic law. The legal implication of this decision reinforces the authority of judges to interpret hadhanah provisions contextually, ensuring the protection of the child’s rights and supporting their growth in accordance with religious teachings and prevailing social norms.

This study discusses the judge’s considerations in granting permission for polygamy to a husband who had committed adultery, as stated in the Religious Court Decision of Tanjung Karang Number: 737/Pdt.G/2024/PA.Tnk. Generally, Law No. 1 of 1974 in conjunction with Law No. 16 of 2019 on Marriage upholds the principle of monogamy but allows polygamy under certain conditions with court approval. This case is particularly interesting because the court granted permission for polygamy to a husband who was proven to have engaged in an affair and committed adultery resulting in a child born out of wedlock. The study aims to identify the legal considerations of the judge and the legal implications regarding the marriage and joint property. The research employs an applied normative legal method with a qualitative approach, using primary data from interviews and secondary data from legislation and legal literature. The results show that the judge considered granting permission for polygamy as a means of legalizing the existing relationship to maintain public morality and prevent continuous sinful behavior, although it conflicts with moral values. Legally, the second wife has no rights over the joint property acquired before the polygamous marriage, as stipulated in Article 65 paragraph (1) letter b of the Marriage Law

This article examines the handling of sexual harassment offenses within Indonesia’s criminal justice system, which faces complex challenges, particularly when restorative justice (RJ) is used as an alternative mechanism for case resolution. This study analyzes the implementation of RJ in sexual harassment cases at the Sleman Resort Police (Polres Sleman), referring to the Indonesian National Police Regulation No. 8 of 2021 on the Handling of Criminal Acts Based on Restorative Justice. The analysis focuses on how this policy is applied at the operational level and how its practice interacts with the normative provisions set forth in Law No. 12 of 2022 on Sexual Violence Crimes (UU TPKS), which explicitly prohibits non-judicial settlement for several categories of sexual violence. Using a qualitative approach through interviews, observations, and document analysis, the study finds that RJ continues to be applied at Polres Sleman despite its potential conflict with the prohibitions stipulated in the UU TPKS. At the operational level, the legal culture of police officers plays a significant role in encouraging the use of RJ, driven by pragmatic considerations such as efficiency in case resolution, social pressure from the community, and officers’ perceptions of the seriousness of sexual harassment cases. As a result, victims’ rights often fail to become the central focus, even though victimology emphasizes the importance of victim recovery and protection. The study concludes that regulatory harmonization, increased sensitivity of law enforcement officers toward sexual violence issues, and strengthened victim protection mechanisms are essential to ensure that the application of RJ does not undermine substantive justice.

Premeditated murder is a severe crime characterized by prior planning (voorbedachte raad), making the proof of premeditation crucial in criminal justice. This element is linked to the mental state of the perpetrator, which cannot be directly proven but must be inferred from objective facts and events. Legal proof often focuses on the elements of Article 340 of the Criminal Code, overlooking criminological aspects such as motives, background, and the process of intent formation. This study analyzes how premeditation is proven in murder cases from a criminological perspective and evaluates the relevance of criminological approaches in judicial deliberations. Using a normative legal method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, supported by philosophical, sociological, and criminological studies, the research finds that proving premeditation requires more than legal indicators like time delay, tool preparation, and structured actions. It also involves understanding the perpetrator's psychological, social, and situational factors. A criminological perspective helps explain the formation of criminal intent, offering a more comprehensive view of premeditation. Integrating criminology into judicial decisions can enhance evidence quality, leading to more substantive and just outcomes.