The evolution of digital technology in the ASEAN region poses a considerable hurdle to the path of legal protection of privacy concerning personal data. This study aims to identify similarities in the legal frameworks for personal data protection and their practical enforcement in Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, and the Philippines. With the qualitative methodology commending comparative study and content analysis, data were collected from official regulations, literature reviews, and interviews with experts in the field of digital law. The main results showed that the protective systems in Singapore and the Philippines were stronger due to the presence of independent supervisory authorities, enforcement of stringent sanctions, and active civil participation from the public. On the other hand, challenges to enforcement and a lack of civil participation offer Indonesia and Malaysia little hope in softening what may be viewed as structural impediments. The study therefore recommends that for the harmonization of policies in ASEAN, supervisory institutions need to be strengthened, definitions of personal data need to be standardized, and public transparency needs to be enhanced. Particularly, this research is important in that it applies an indicator-based comparative approach and offers actionable policy recommendations that can be adopted regionally, addressing the challenges presented by the new digital era.

Access to justice is a fundamental right in a legal state, yet vulnerable groups in Indonesia still face various structural barriers in exercising this right. High litigation costs, complex legal procedures, and the limited availability of legal aid services significantly hinder their ability to seek justice. This study aims to identify the key obstacles faced by vulnerable groups in accessing the justice system and evaluate the effectiveness of existing legal aid policies. Using a qualitative approach with an empirical-sociological methodology, data were collected through in-depth interviews with legal aid providers, vulnerable individuals, and judicial officials, as well as a review of relevant legal documents and case studies. The findings reveal that 52% of vulnerable individuals are unaware of their rights to free legal aid, while 45% of domestic violence victims struggle to access legal protection due to procedural barriers. Additionally, 58% of cases involving low-income individuals were rejected due to administrative shortcomings. Statistical analysis further indicates a significant negative correlation between income levels and access to legal representation (r = -0.76, p < 0.05). These results highlight the urgent need for policy reforms to create a more inclusive and equitable legal system. This study contributes to the discourse on legal accessibility by providing empirical evidence on structural barriers and offering recommendations to enhance legal aid services, particularly through digital solutions and policy interventions tailored to the needs of vulnerable groups