This study explores the development of a socio-legal framework for restorative justice (RJ) as an alternative approach to addressing online hate speech in Indonesia. In light of the increasing limitations of retributive legal systems—especially in digital contexts—this research investigates how RJ principles can be applied to digital conflict resolution involving victims, offenders, digital communities, and legal institutions. Using a qualitative descriptive design and a socio-legal lens, data were collected through semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and online observation. Findings reveal a substantial gap between formal punitive mechanisms and the social realities of online interaction. While legal actors tend to adopt retributive responses, digital communities have shown greater alignment with restorative practices, including public apologies, dialogue, and empathy.Four major themes rose to the fore: institutional resistance, psychosocial needs of the victims, grassroots initiatives for restorative justice, and the place of ethical technology in that regard. The most important outcome is an approved Socio-Legal Restorative Justice Digital Framework, which synergistically combines normative legal knowledge, community knowledge, and digital mediation tools. The framework theoretically and practically relates to a socio-juridical lexicon for promoting inclusive, participatory, and transformative justice in cyberspace, with an avenue for implementing and evolving adaptive policy in the future.

Gender-Based Violence (GBV) remains a critical issue in Indonesia, with a significant increase in reported cases over the past five years. Despite the implementation of the Sexual Violence Crime Law (UU TPKS) as a progressive step toward victim protection, challenges persist in the law enforcement process, particularly in integrating gender perspectives into the criminal justice system. This study aims to analyze the role of gender perspectives in sentencing policies for GBV perpetrators in Indonesia and compare them with more progressive legal frameworks in other countries. Using a qualitative approach with phenomenological methods, the study examines national regulations, judicial decisions, and stakeholder interviews, including victims, law enforcement officers, and legal experts. The findings indicate that while the number of GBV cases reported has increased from 15,200 in 2018 to 35,200 in 2023, only 10% of reported cases resulted in convictions. This reflects systemic weaknesses, such as insufficient legal enforcement, limited gender-sensitive training among judicial actors, and societal stigma against victims. Additionally, comparative analysis with countries like Sweden and Canada suggests that more inclusive and restorative justice approaches can enhance victim protection and reduce recidivism rates. This study contributes to the discourse on criminal law reform by highlighting the need for stronger regulatory frameworks, improved law enforcement mechanisms, and technological innovations in reporting and case management. The findings provide policy recommendations for strengthening Indonesia’s GBV sentencing policies through a gender-sensitive and victim-oriented approach.

The oversight and enforcement of the advocate code of ethics in Indonesia continue to face various challenges, affecting the effectiveness of existing regulations. The number of ethical violations among advocates has increased significantly, rising from 120 cases in 2018 to 345 cases in 2023. The most common infractions include conflicts of interest, abuse of authority, and gratuities. One of the primary factors contributing to weak ethical enforcement is the current oversight system, which remains limited to advocate organizations without the involvement of an independent regulatory body. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of advocate oversight mechanisms in Indonesia, compare them with best practices in other jurisdictions, and identify measures to enhance accountability and transparency in the legal profession. The research employs a normative legal method with a comparative law approach and empirical studies. The analysis includes an examination of existing regulations, case reports on ethical violations, and interviews with key stakeholders, including advocates, clients, and legal analysts. The findings indicate that only 40% of reported violations result in strict sanctions, while only 10% of advocates found guilty of ethical breaches face license revocation. Additionally, a survey of 500 respondents reveals that only 35% of the public is aware of the procedures for filing complaints against unethical advocates, highlighting a lack of transparency in the oversight system. This study contributes to the discourse by recommending the establishment of an independent regulatory body to monitor advocate compliance with ethical standards and the enhanced utilization of digital technology in the oversight system. With more transparent and accountable regulatory reforms, ethical violations within the legal profession can be minimized, ultimately strengthening public trust in Indonesia’s legal system.