Publication Search

This study analyzes the minimum age of marriage in Islamic jurisprudence and compares it with the positive law regulations in Indonesia and Malaysia. Using a normative legal method with comparative and conceptual approaches, the study draws on primary sources, including the Qur'an, hadith, Law Number 16 of 2019 on Marriage in Indonesia, and the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984 in Malaysia. The analysis focuses on how Islamic legal principles concerning marriage eligibility are interpreted and incorporated into contemporary legal frameworks in both countries. The findings reveal that Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) associates marital readiness with the concept of baligh (puberty) without prescribing a specific numerical age, whereas state law establishes fixed minimum age requirements to safeguard the rights and welfare of women and children. Indonesia sets the minimum marriage age at 19 years for both males and females, while Malaysia prescribes 18 years for males and 16 years for females, with judicial dispensation available in both jurisdictions under certain circumstances. These legal arrangements demonstrate each country's effort to harmonize classical Islamic jurisprudence with contemporary social protection objectives through institutional ijtihad, reflecting a balance between religious principles, legal certainty, and public welfare in regulating marriage.

Judicial digital transformation through the implementation of e-Court and e-Litigation represents a strategic initiative of the Supreme Court of Indonesia to establish a modern, effective, and efficient judiciary. These innovations have successfully transformed various stages of civil case administration and litigation into faster and more transparent processes. However, the success of digitalization in case examination has not been accompanied by similar reforms in the execution of court judgments. This study aims to analyze the regulation of civil judgment execution following the implementation of e-Court and e-Litigation, identify challenges encountered in practice, and formulate a concept of execution digitalization as part of judicial reform. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The legal materials consist of primary legal sources in the form of legislation and Supreme Court regulations, as well as secondary legal sources including scholarly literature and previous studies. The findings reveal that although e-Court and e-Litigation have accelerated dispute resolution processes, the execution of civil judgments remains largely conventional. Consequently, several challenges persist, including delays in execution, lack of transparency, and limited supervision by litigating parties. Therefore, the development of an integrated Digital Execution System linked to existing electronic judicial platforms is necessary to enhance the effectiveness of judgment enforcement and ensure greater legal certainty for justice seekers.

Indonesia is currently experiencing an emergency situation regarding sexual violence, which compromises national social resilience. The enactment of the Sexual Violence Crimes Law (UU TPKS) creates new legal mandates for healthcare professionals. Midwives, serving as frontline providers in primary care and remote areas, act as the first professional contact for survivors, yet they lack adequate legal certainty regarding medico-legal duties and preparedness within the midwifery educational framework. Objectives: This study aims to analyze the regulatory synchronization concerning the limited medico-legal authority of midwives in implementing the UU TPKS and to formulate reconstruction strategies for professional standards and the national midwifery curriculum. Methods: This normative juridical (doctrinal) research utilizes statute, conceptual, analytical, and comparative approaches. Data analysis was conducted qualitatively-normatively through systematic and teleological interpretations, evaluated using coherence and prescriptive frameworks. Results: The study reveals a significant disharmony of norms between the UU TPKS and Minister of Health Regulation (Permenkes) No. 2 of 2025, which imposes bureaucratic barriers on safe abortion access for rape victims. Additionally, the Midwife Professional Standards (Kepmenkes No. 320/2020) fail to integrate basic clinical forensic authorities, compounded by a national techno-centric curriculum that overlooks Trauma-Informed Care (TIC). Conclusions: Legal certainty for midwives and comprehensive justice for survivors can only be accomplished by reconstructing inclusive competency standards, eliminating administrative boundaries through the "Medical First" principle, and integrating primary health law and trauma-sensitive care modules into the national midwifery curriculum.

Bangka Belitung Islands Province as the largest tin producer faces legality dilemmas and criminalization of artisanal miners due to permit centralization through Law Number 3 of 2020. This study aims to analyze the impact of centralization on artisanal miners' legal access, criminalization practices under Article 158 of the Mineral and Coal Law, and the form of Bangka Artisanal Miners Alliance (ATRB) struggle demanding legal certainty. The research employs qualitative case study approach with data collection techniques through literature study and document analysis of regulations, court decisions, and media reports. Findings show centralization narrows legal access causing slow and bureaucratic process for Artisanal Mining Area (WPR) designation and Artisanal Mining Permit (IPR) issuance. Criminalization practices more frequently affect small-scale miners major actors, creating injustice perceptions and worsening socio-economic conditions of mining households. ATRB emerges as a social movement demanding legal recognition through accelerated WPR and IPR plus economic redistribution through fair tin trade governance. Non-transparent royalty management reaching Rp1.7 trillion worsens community vulnerability. This research contributes to social movement and natural resource politics studies by emphasizing the importance of participatory legalization and governance reform to reduce social conflict.

This study aims to examine and analyze the pretrial examination mechanism, which also assesses the substance of the case, as reflected in Pretrial Decision Number 10/Pid.Pra/2020/PN.Lbo at the Limboto District Court. The method used in this study is normative legal research, applying a statute approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The analysis is conducted qualitatively through deductive reasoning, namely by explaining general legal provisions and then drawing more specific conclusions.The results indicate that Pretrial Decision Number 10/Pid.Pra/2020/PN.Lbo, specifically the ruling declaring the Petitioner's actions not a criminal act of corruption, is deemed inconsistent with the nature and scope of pretrial proceedings. This is because pretrial examinations are principally intended only to examine formal aspects with a brief examination process, and therefore should not include an assessment of the subject matter of the case. Furthermore, the lack of a legal remedy mechanism for the pretrial decision also raises issues of legal certainty. In fact, based on the principle of res judicata pro veritate habetur, every court decision must be considered correct, valid, and binding until there is a decision from a higher court that overturns the decision.

This study aims to analyse the legal status of physical possession evidenced by a Letter C under land law, as well as the issue of legal certainty in the resolution of land disputes by the state. Many members of the public still rely on a Letter C as proof of possession of the land they own, even though this document serves only as administrative evidence and not as a strong instrument of proof of ownership. This study employs a juridical-normative legal research method using a legislative approach and a conceptual approach. The legal materials were gathered through a literature review and analysed qualitatively, with the findings presented in a descriptive format. The results indicate that Letter C possesses relatively weak evidential weight as it is merely an administrative record that does not follow the procedures within the land registration system as stipulated by the UUPA. Currently, Letter C serves only as a guide and therefore no longer possesses legal force equivalent to a certificate. The land system in Indonesia adopts a negative publication system with a positive tendency, meaning that a certificate constitutes strong evidence of rights, but may still be revoked if another party is able to prove their rights.

This study examines the regulation of copyright royalties as joint property in Indonesia, the United States, and Europe, aiming to provide recommendations for better legal implementation. The research employs a normative juridical method with a comparative legal approach, utilizing library research and qualitative analysis of primary and secondary legal materials. The findings indicate that Indonesia, the United States, and Europe share common ground in recognizing royalties derived from copyright as joint property when such economic benefits are obtained during marriage. However, significant differences exist in their approaches. European countries, particularly Spain and the Republic of Moldova, clearly distinguish between exclusive rights and economic rights, where copyright remains the creator's personal property while royalties are classified as joint property. The United States demonstrates considerable flexibility through state-level regulations, adopting either community property systems or equitable distribution systems. Indonesia, through Decision No. 1622/PDT.G/2023/PA.JB, has begun recognizing royalties as joint property. Nevertheless, Indonesia still requires clearer and more comprehensive regulations to ensure legal certainty regarding the status of royalties as joint property and their distribution following divorce. This study contributes to developing legal frameworks that balance protecting creators' personal rights with the principle of fairness in family law.

The development of information and communication technology has increased the use of electronic documents in legal and business activities, thereby affecting the evidentiary system in Indonesian civil procedural law. This study aims to analyze the legal regulation of electronic evidence and its evidentiary strength in resolving civil cases under Indonesian civil procedural law. The research method used is normative juridical research with statutory and library research approaches. The data were obtained from primary and secondary legal materials and analyzed qualitatively. The results show that electronic evidence has been legally recognized through Law Number 11 of 2008 in conjunction with Law Number 19 of 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions. Its evidentiary strength has the same legal position as other forms of evidence as long as it fulfills the requirements of authenticity, integrity, and validity of electronic data. Therefore, more detailed regulations regarding authentication standards and examination procedures for electronic evidence are still needed to ensure legal certainty in civil court practices.

The digital transformation of the Indonesian judicial system through the implementation of e-court and e-litigation necessitates a redefinition of conventional evidentiary laws, which have historically been governed by the Herziene Inlandsch Reglement (HIR) and the Rechtreglement voor de Buitengewesten (RBg). This research aims to analyze the evidentiary strength of electronic documents as expanded means of proof in civil proceedings and to identify the challenges regarding their implementation. The research method employed is normative legal research using a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The findings indicate that based on the principle of functional equivalence, electronic documents hold a legal status equivalent to paper-based documents, provided they meet the requirements of integrity, accessibility, and authenticity through certified electronic signatures as mandated by Law Number 1 of 2024 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions. The evidentiary strength of an electronic document may reach the level of conclusive evidence, similar to an authentic deed, if supported by a reliable electronic system. However, implementation still faces technical hurdles concerning metadata verification and limited human resource competency within the judiciary. This research recommends the urgent need for a new codification of civil procedural law and the standardization of digital forensic procedures in trials to ensure legal certainty and justice for all parties in the digital era.

Land rights disputes arising from overlapping land certificates remain a complex agrarian law issue frequently encountered in Indonesia. This phenomenon reflects weaknesses in the land administration system, particularly in data collection, land measurement, and certificate issuance. Such disputes create conflicts, legal uncertainty, and reduced public trust in the land registration system. In practice, these disputes are generally resolved through civil litigation procedures in the District Court. This study aims to comprehensively analyze civil procedural law in resolving land rights disputes involving overlapping certificates and to examine the evidentiary strength of land certificates in judicial proceedings. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory and conceptual approaches, supported by primary and secondary legal materials. The findings indicate that dispute resolution begins with the filing of a lawsuit, followed by mediation, court examination, and the evidentiary process as the most crucial stage in determining lawful ownership. Land certificates serve as strong evidence; however, they are not absolute, as they may be challenged if administrative or substantive legal defects are identified. Judges play a central role in assessing certificate validity by considering land history, physical possession, good faith, and compliance with legal procedures. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of dispute resolution still requires improvement through better land administration, enhanced data accuracy, and stronger institutional integration.

This study aims to analyze legal protection for auction winners of mortgage rights within the framework of Indonesian laws and regulations. The auction of mortgage rights serves as a mechanism for executing secured collateral with binding legal force; however, in practice, it often raises legal issues, particularly concerning legal certainty and protection for auction winners. This research employs a normative juridical method using statutory and conceptual approaches. The findings indicate that legal protection for auction winners has been regulated under various laws, including the Mortgage Law, auction regulations, and provisions governing collateral execution. Nevertheless, challenges remain in its implementation, such as lawsuits filed by debtors or third parties that hinder the transfer and control of auctioned objects. This condition reflects a discrepancy between legal norms and their practical application. Therefore, strengthening regulations and ensuring consistency among law enforcement authorities are necessary to guarantee legal certainty and protection for auction winners. This study is expected to contribute to the development of secured transactions law and the improvement of auction practices in Indonesia.

The Comprehensive Systematic Land Registration Program (Pendaftaran Tanah Sistematis Lengkap (PTSL) is a government initiative aimed at providing legal certainty regarding land rights by accelerating land registration in Indonesia. However, in its implementation, various administrative problems have been identified that result in the issuance of Certificates of Ownership (SHM) with administrative defects, particularly regarding land that previously held a Right to Build (Hak Guna Bangunan (HGB) or a title deed in the form of a Deed of Sale and Purchase (Akta Jual Beli (AJB). This study aims to analyze the mechanism for canceling SHMs due to administrative errors in the implementation of the PTSL and the forms of legal protection available to parties harmed by the issuance of such administratively defective SHMs. The research method employed is normative legal research using a statutory approach and a case-based approach. The results of the study indicate that the cancellation of SHM due to administrative defects can be carried out through administrative mechanisms at the National Land Agency or through a lawsuit in the Administrative Court. Examples of administrative errors by the PTSL committee include errors in the verification of legal data, failure to conduct a land history investigation, errors in the measurement of land parcels, and disregard for the rights of other parties who previously held HGBs or AJBs. Legal protection for aggrieved parties is provided through administrative remedies, civil lawsuits, administrative court actions, and the blocking of problematic certificates. Holders of a previously issued Deed of Sale (AJB) have the legal standing to seek the cancellation of a Certificate of Ownership (SHM) issued in another party’s name, as the AJB serves as authentic evidence demonstrating a legal relationship to the land in question.

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.

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.

The difference in the determination of when a divorce takes effect between Islamic law and statutory law raises issues in the judicial practice of the Sharia Court. In a number of cases, judges have issued a single bain sughra divorce even though, according to Sharia law, the husband has already issued three divorces. This raises issues regarding the validity of reconciliation and its legal implications for the status of the children. This study aims to analyze the differences in the concept of divorce, the reasons for the judges’ decisions, the validity of reconciliation, and the legal consequences for children in both legal systems. This study employs a mixed-methods approach (normative and empirical) using legislative, conceptual, and comparative frameworks. The analysis is conducted through comparative theory, legal certainty, maqāṣid al-syarī’ah, and child protection. The results indicate a fundamental difference between substantive validity in Islamic law and formal validity in positive law. The Sharia Court’s ruling on a single bain sughra divorce is based on procedural caution, yet it creates a dualism regarding the validity of reconciliation and the potential for legal uncertainty. Regarding children, positive law provides full recognition, while Islamic law continues to emphasize the caution regarding lineage but is oriented toward protecting the best interests of the child. This study offers an integrative approach by recognizing out-of-court divorce as a substantive legal fact to bridge legal certainty and justice.

Awig-Awig (traditional customary law) is a form of written customary law that exists and continues to develop within indigenous communities, particularly in Bali and Lombok. As part of Indonesia's pluralistic legal system, Awig-Awig plays a significant role in regulating social order, maintaining harmony, governing inter-community relations, and preserving local cultural and religious values. This study aims to examine the existence of Awig-Awig as a binding source of law within indigenous communities, as well as to analyze its relationship with the national legal system. The methods used in this research include juridical-normative and sociological approaches, supported by case studies conducted in several indigenous villages in Bali and Lombok. The results show that Awig-Awig remains highly relevant, respected, and effectively implemented as a community guideline. However, harmonization with state law is necessary to prevent potential norm conflicts and ensure legal certainty. These findings highlight the importance of formal recognition, protection, and integration of customary law within Indonesia’s national legal framework.

The development of digital technology has transformed trading patterns through the emergence of live shopping, a phenomenon that enables real-time interaction between sellers and consumers. Although it offers marketing efficiency, this model poses significant legal risks, including misleading information, promotional manipulation, and product non-conformity. This study aims to analyze legal certainty in consumer protection within live shopping transactions, examine the forms of business actors’ liability for consumer losses, and identify obstacles to regulatory implementation along with efforts to strengthen supervision.The research method employed is normative legal research using both a statute approach and a conceptual approach. The results indicate that legal certainty in consumer protection within this ecosystem is grounded in the integration of Law No. 8 of 1999 (Consumer Protection Law) as the lex generalis and Government Regulation No. 80 of 2019 (Electronic Commerce/PMSE) as the lex specialis, which recognizes the validity of real-time electronic contracts. The legal liability of business actors is strict liability in nature, in accordance with Article 19 of the Consumer Protection Law, and may also be construed as a tort (Article 1365 of the Civil Code) in cases involving distortion of visual information.However, the effectiveness of these regulations is hindered by the ephemeral nature of transactions and low levels of digital literacy. This study recommends the implementation of technology-based supervisory systems (suptech), strengthening the oversight function of platforms (PPMSE), and policy synchronization between the Ministry of Trade and the Ministry of Communication and Informatics in standardizing business actor verification to ensure the security of the digital commerce ecosystem.

The implementation of civil justice in Indonesia is fundamentally guided by the principles of simplicity, speed, and low cost. However, in practice, the regulation concerning the time limits for summons and the determination of trial schedules remains inadequate, leading to legal uncertainty. This study aims to analyze the legal certainty of time limits in summons and trial scheduling within civil procedural law, as well as to examine its implications for the effectiveness of case resolution. This research employs a normative legal method with statutory and conceptual approaches, supported by a descriptive-analytical design. The findings indicate that existing regulations, particularly those derived from the Herzien Inlandsch Reglement (HIR) and Rechtsreglement voor de Buitengewesten (RBg), only provide minimum standards for summons but do not comprehensively regulate the timeframe for determining the first hearing or intervals between subsequent hearings. As a result, there is broad discretion in judicial practice, which leads to inconsistencies among courts, repeated trial delays, increased litigation costs, and reduced access to justice. Although recent reforms through electronic court systems have improved the mechanism of summons delivery, they have not sufficiently addressed the issue of time management in trial proceedings. This study concludes that the absence of clear and comprehensive regulations on trial timeframes weakens legal certainty and hinders the realization of efficient judicial processes. Therefore, strengthening normative regulations on trial scheduling is essential to support a more effective, predictable, and equitable civil justice system.

Human Trafficking (TPPO) has undergone a significant transformation in its modus operandi alongside the massive use of information technology, giving rise to the phenomenon of cyber-recruitment within the online scam industry. This study aims to analyze the juridical construction of the criminal elements in the cyber-recruitment modus operandi based on Law Number 21 of 2007, and to evaluate the potential disharmony of norms between the TPPO regulation and the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE) regarding the regulation of digital evidence. The research method employed is normative legal research with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The results indicate that, dogmatically, the elements of TPPO—comprising the process of virtual recruitment, the means of fraudulent job promises, and the purpose of digital forced labor exploitation—under Law No. 21 of 2007 remain relevant for prosecuting cyber-recruitment perpetrators, although it demands a broader legal interpretation of cyberspace realities. However, legal certainty issues were found due to the lack of synchronicity in the regulation of digital evidence, where differences in procedures and qualifications exist between electronic evidence in the TPPO Law and the evidentiary standards in the UU ITE, which are volatile in nature. The implications of this research conclude the need for regulatory synchronization through the establishment of technical guidelines for handling TPPO-specific electronic evidence to provide a solid legal foundation for law enforcement agencies. This step is crucial to overcome cross-border jurisdictional obstacles and to ensure substantive justice and comprehensive protection of victims' rights in the digital era.

Trade secrets are a type of Intellectual Property Right that plays a crucial role in providing legal protection for business information with economic value and kept confidential by its owner. In the food industry, recipes not only serve as production guidelines but also serve as a business's identity and competitive advantage. Legal issues can arise if the recipe is used or owned by others without permission, especially when conflicts arise within the business or during competition. This situation can trigger trade secret disputes that can be detrimental to business owners, both financially and sustainably. This article discusses the position of fried chicken recipes as trade secrets in culinary business practices in Indonesia and the forms of legal protection available to rights holders. The discussion was conducted based on the provisions of Law Number 30 of 2000 concerning Trade Secrets, using a normative approach. The analysis shows that a fried chicken recipe falls into the trade secret category if it meets the requirements of being unknown to the public, having economic value, and being strictly maintained by the business owner. Therefore, legal protection for trade secrets is crucial to prevent unfair business competition and provide legal certainty and protection for culinary businesses in Indonesia