The rapid advancement of information and communication technology has fundamentally altered evidentiary practices within Indonesia's criminal justice system, particularly concerning the legal standing of electronic evidence, which is inherently susceptible to alteration and difficult to trace. As the lex generalis, the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) continues to adhere to a closed evidentiary system under Article 184 paragraph (1), which does not explicitly recognize electronic evidence as a distinct category, whereas the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE) affirms it as a valid extension of admissible evidence. This study employs a normative juridical method, utilizing statutory and conceptual approaches, alongside a descriptive-prescriptive analytical technique grounded in grammatical, systematic, and teleological interpretation of primary and secondary legal materials. The findings reveal a paradigmatic conflict between the restrictive framework of KUHAP and the progressive orientation of UU ITE, resulting in ambiguity regarding whether digital evidence constitutes an independent category or merely falls under documentary or circumstantial evidence. This uncertainty is further compounded by law enforcement officials' limited understanding of chain of custody principles and digital forensic procedures, contributing to inconsistent judicial rulings across courts. The study concludes that comprehensive regulatory harmonization is essential, extending beyond partial amendments, and recommends leveraging Law Number 20 of 2025 as a foundation for strengthening the normative recognition of electronic evidence as an independent evidentiary category to achieve stronger legal certainty.
Although crimes and other rule violations in prison are common, little is known about how those rule violations are processed and disposed of by prison officials. Wolff v. McDonnell, a 1974 Supreme Court case, created some standards for state prisons, including certain due process rights for prisoners during disciplinary hearings. However, these standards were broad and left room for state discretion in implementation, potentially generating considerable differences in policy and practice. There has been little systematic analysis of state differences in procedural safeguards and how disciplinary procedures are documented in policy, which is an important gap in the empirical literature on severity and disparities in disciplinary outcomes. This study provides a nationwide review focused on stated goals and procedural elements present in written policy. It appears that while the baseline procedural elements regarding prison disciplinary processes are somewhat consistent between states, there is substantial variation within those elements as well as the assigned procedural goals. Establishing this kind of baseline information is critical to advancing our understanding of prison discipline, for both theory and practice.
The implementation of legal aid in Indonesia, although it has many obstacles in its implementation, normatively has a fairly strong foundation. This study examines the implementation of legal aid for persons with disabilities by focusing on the role of local governments through strategic policies in the form of regional regulations or other regulations. Based on the obstacles in its implementation, this study aims to offer a reconstruction of the legal aid model for people with disabilities in the regions. By using a normative approach to legislation, in this case the Legal Aid Law and the Law on Persons with Disabilities, this study found that access to justice for persons with disabilities can be carried out through legal aid in the regions as a form of equal rights before the law as affirmed in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. In addition, this study also found that with the budgeting authority in the APBD, according to Article 19 of the Legal Aid Law, the legal aid model for persons with disabilities can be reconstructed by strengthening additional services in the form of personal assessments and translators included in legal aid procedures so that people with disabilities who face the law are more assured and assured in accessing justice.
The investigation stage constitutes a crucial phase in the criminal justice system, as it determines the direction and quality of subsequent law enforcement processes. Within the context of Indonesian criminal procedural law, the Criminal Procedure Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana/KUHAP) grants extensive authority to law enforcement officials, particularly investigators, in order to ensure the effective disclosure of criminal offenses. However, such dominance of authority has the potential to create an imbalance between the interest of law enforcement effectiveness and the protection of human rights, especially when it is not accompanied by adequate mechanisms of limitation and oversight. This study aims to critically analyze the dominance of law enforcement authority at the investigation stage and its implications for law enforcement effectiveness and the potential for abuse of power. The research employs normative legal research using statutory and conceptual approaches, supported by qualitative analysis of legal doctrines, legislation, and relevant academic literature. The findings indicate that while the dominance of investigative authority does contribute to the effectiveness of investigations, it simultaneously creates opportunities for abuse of power due to weak internal and external oversight mechanisms. This condition results in the erosion of the principles of due process of law and the protection of suspects’ rights within the criminal justice system. Therefore, this study emphasizes the need to strengthen judicial control mechanisms, enhance the accountability of law enforcement officials, and reform criminal procedural law in order to achieve a balance between effective law enforcement and the protection of human rights within a democratic rule-of-law state.
The purpose of this writing is to analyze Article 14 of Law Number 31 of 1999 jo. Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption has a delegative character, because its enactment depends on the provisions of other laws that expressly declare a violation as a criminal act of corruption. The construction of these norms in practice gives rise to ambivalence in law enforcement, especially when various acts that are detrimental to state finances occur in strategic sectors that are not explicitly qualified as corruption crimes in sectoral laws. This condition has the potential to create a legal vacuum and hinder the effectiveness of eradicating corruption as an extraordinary crime. This study aims to analyze the practice of implementing Article 14 of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption and examine these provisions from the perspective of legal certainty, justice, and criminal law policy. The research method used is normative legal research with a legislative approach and a case approach. Research data was obtained through literature studies on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials that were analyzed qualitatively. The results of the study show that the delegative and limiting nature of Article 14 has implications for the low predictability of the law and opens up ambivalence between norms and law enforcement practices. In reality, law enforcement officials often apply the Corruption Crime Law to acts that are normatively outside the scope of Article 14, taking into account the existence of state financial losses and the interests of substantive justice. Therefore, Article 14 needs to be interpreted systemically and progressively and supported by the reformulation of norms and harmonization of laws and regulations to be in line with the dynamics and complexity of modern corruption crimes.
The protection of suspects’ rights during the investigation phase is a fundamental component of a fair and effective criminal justice system. This study examines the implementation of the principle of due process of law in Indonesia and its implications for safeguarding human rights in criminal investigations. Utilizing a normative legal research approach, supported by statutory and conceptual analysis, the research evaluates both the legal framework and practical application of suspects’ rights under the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), the 1945 Constitution, and international human rights instruments such as the ICCPR. Findings indicate that while Indonesia has established comprehensive regulations to protect suspects, the practical implementation remains inconsistent due to structural, cultural, and procedural challenges. Deviations such as limited access to legal counsel, incomplete documentation of interrogations, and occasional coercive practices undermine adherence to due process standards. The study highlights the critical need for regulatory improvements, capacity building for investigators, and strengthened supervision mechanisms to ensure full protection of suspects’ rights. Enhancing the conformity of investigative practices with due process principles is essential not only for safeguarding individual rights but also for maintaining public trust and the integrity of the Indonesian criminal justice system.
A traffic accident is a social risk event that causes serious losses, either in the form of injury, loss of property, or death of a family member. The State provides protection through the Road Traffic Accident Fund as stipulated in Law Number 34 of 1964 and Government Regulation Number 18 of 1965. However, in practice, the regulation of the status of victims and the coverage of the heirs of the beneficiaries still raises juridical and social problems because they do not fully reflect substantive justice. This study aims to analyze the concept of victims and heirs in the applicable Road Traffic Accident Fund regulations, as well as formulate a more equitable reconstruction of the regulation. This research is normative legal research with a legislative, conceptual, and comparative approach. Analysis is carried out on positive legal norms and social realities that develop in society. The results of the study show that the definition of victim and the limitation of the coverage of heirs in the current positive law are narrow and administrative, so they are less responsive to the complexity of social relations and the economic dependence of the families of traffic accident victims. The mismatch between normative boundaries and social realities has implications for the non-achievement of the goals of social protection and substantive justice. Therefore, this study offers a reconstruction of the interpretation of the concept of victims and an expansion of the coverage of heirs that is more responsive, inclusive, and oriented towards social protection.
Technological advancement in information systems has significantly transformed the criminal evidentiary framework by positioning electronic evidence as an increasingly essential instrument in proving criminal acts. Indonesian Criminal Procedure Law, particularly Law Number 20 of 2025 on Criminal Procedure, explicitly recognizes electronic evidence as lawful evidence with equal standing to conventional forms of evidence. In Aceh, recognition of electronic evidence is also embedded within the Aceh Qanun Number 7 of 2013 on Jinayat Procedure Law, which accommodates electronic information and recordings through the concept of qarinah (circumstantial evidence). Nevertheless, differences remain in regulatory frameworks and evidentiary standards between the national criminal procedure system and the jinayat procedural system, potentially leading to divergences in evidentiary assessment. Such disparities may affect the implementation of legal certainty and justice within judicial practice in Aceh. This study aims to examine the legal position of electronic evidence under the Jinayat Procedural Law and Law Number 20 of 2025 on Criminal Procedure, to analyze the differences in evidentiary standards applied in both legal systems, and to assess their implications for the principles of justice and legal certainty. The research employs a normative juridical method using statutory and conceptual approaches. Data were collected through library research involving primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials related to electronic evidentiary rules, and were analyzed using qualitative descriptive techniques. The findings indicate that Law Number 20 of 2025 grants electronic evidence an independent evidentiary status, provided that requirements such as authenticity, integrity, system reliability, and lawful acquisition are fulfilled. In contrast, the Jinayat Procedural Law integrates electronic evidence within the framework of qarinah, where its use is guided by Islamic legal principles, particularly in ta’zir offenses. These differing standards result in variations in how electronic evidence is evaluated within general courts and sharia courts in Aceh. Consequently, there is a need for harmonization between national criminal procedural law and jinayat procedural law, the development of more comprehensive technical guidelines, and the strengthening of digital forensics practices within the Sharia Courts to ensure legal certainty, justice, and effective proof without disregarding Islamic legal principles
Waqf is a legal act involving the dedication of privately owned property for religious purposes and/or public welfare in accordance with Islamic law. Article 16 paragraph (2) of Law Number 41 of 2004 concerning Waqf stipulates that waqf objects must consist of movable or immovable assets legally owned by the waqif (the person who endows the property). Furthermore, Article 4 of Government Regulation Number 28 of 1977 emphasizes that land designated as waqf must constitute legally owned land that is free from any encumbrances, legal attachments, seizure, or disputes. However, in practice, waqf disputes still occur due to the dedication of land with problematic ownership status, as found in Juli District, Bireuen Regency. This study aims to analyze the resolution of waqf disputes arising from the annulment of a Waqf Pledge Deed based on the Supreme Court Decision Number 0314/Pdt.G/2014. This research employs a normative-empirical juridical method using statutory and case approaches. The study utilizes primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, supported by field data obtained through interviews, which are subsequently analyzed qualitatively. The results indicate that the resolution of waqf land disputes at the Bireuen Sharia Court is conducted by examining the validity of the elements of waqf, particularly the legal ownership status of the endowed land. The Beunyot Village Religious Affairs Office (KUA) in Juli District, acting as the Official Registrar of Waqf Pledge Deeds (Pejabat Pembuat Akta Ikrar Wakaf/PPAIW), issued the Waqf Pledge Deed after considering the fulfillment of formal requirements, including the existence of the waqif, nazhir (waqf administrator), and waqf object. However, the Bireuen Sharia Court declared the deed invalid and nullified it by law because the endowed land was not personally owned by the waqif, thereby contradicting the statutory provisions governing waqf. It is recommended that the Ministry of Religious Affairs, through the Beunyot Village KUA as the PPAIW, conduct more thorough verification of land ownership status before issuing Waqf Pledge Deeds. Furthermore, nazhir, community leaders, and religious counselors should enhance public education regarding waqf regulations to ensure that society understands the legal requirements of valid waqf and to prevent future waqf disputes.
Marriage agreements are agreements entered into before or after marriage that generally regulate the separation of marital assets. Under Article 147 of the Indonesian Civil Code and Article 29 of the Marriage Law, such agreements must be executed in the form of a notarial deed and registered with the Marriage Registration Office to be legally binding upon third parties. In practice, however, many spouses fail to register their marriage agreements, creating potential legal uncertainty. This study aims to analyze the legal consequences of unregistered marriage agreements and examine the responsibility of notaries in preventing such situations. The research employs a normative juridical method using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. Primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials were analyzed qualitatively. The findings reveal that an unregistered marriage agreement remains valid and binding only between the spouses but has no legal effect on third parties, as stipulated in Article 152 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Notaries are responsible not only for drafting marriage agreement deeds but also for providing legal counseling to ensure their registration with the Civil Registration Office or the Office of Religious Affairs. Therefore, spouses should register their marriage agreements to ensure legal certainty and protection for all parties.
This study conducts a systematic review and relational analysis of the literature on body-worn cameras in policing, focusing on adoption, activation, operational governance, audiovisual framing, and mentions of violence, use of force, complaints, and accountability. The objective is not to estimate causal effects or to claim that the technology reduces violence in all contexts, but to map how categories of use and categories of reported outcomes appear associated across the analyzed articles, The review considered 128 articles retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science, published between 2015 and 2025, after deduplication, screening by title, abstract, and keywords, full-text reading when necessary, and the application of explicit empirical relevance criteria. The study presents the list of included articles. The coding protocol, decision rules, category-based rates, and the operational definition of co-occurrence. The Jaccard coefficient, permutation testing, and False Discovery Rate adjustment were used to identify robust relational patterns, while a decision tree was employed as a descriptive classification tool. The findings indicate that structured camera use, especially when associated with clear activation rules, institutional supervision, and data governance, is repeatedly linked to discussions of use of force, complaints, accountability, and police activity. The contribution lies in offering a transparent, non-causal synthesis that supports future hypotheses and practical decisions regarding body-worn camera programs.
This research is motivated by the enactment of the Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry Number 14 of 2023, which regulates the settlement of existing businesses and/or activities within conservation areas, including the Rawa Singkil Wildlife Reserve in Aceh, an area with significant ecological functions as a wildlife habitat and a strategic peatland ecosystem. The implementation of the conservation partnership scheme under this regulation raises legal issues concerning the balance between resolving existing activities and maintaining the ecological functions of conservation areas. This study aims to analyze the concretization of the precautionary principle in the Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry Number 14 of 2023 and its juridical implications for the protection of the Rawa Singkil Wildlife Reserve.This research employs normative legal research using statutory and conceptual approaches. Primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials are analyzed qualitatively based on the precautionary principle, the theory of the hierarchy of norms, legal harmonization theory, and legal protection theory. The results indicate that the concretization of the precautionary principle in the regulation remains partial and predominantly administrative in nature. Although it has been implemented through inventory, verification, activity restrictions, ecosystem restoration, and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, the regulation has not yet positioned ecological risks, area sensitivity, and the potential for irreversible environmental damage as the primary parameters in determining settlement measures. The implementation of the Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry Number 14 of 2023 in the Rawa Singkil Wildlife Reserve may provide legal certainty and strengthen conservation protection if it is directed toward ecosystem restoration, effective supervision, and the return of areas to the state. However, the application of the conservation partnership scheme without rigorous ecological risk analysis has the potential to weaken the protection of peatland hydrological functions and wildlife habitats. Therefore, this regulation should be revised by placing the protection of ecological functions of conservation areas and ecological risk assessment as the main parameters in resolving existing businesses and/or activities.
The use of the undercover buy technique in the investigation of narcotics crimes has obtained a legal basis in Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics. However, the absence of detailed implementation arrangements regarding procedures, limits of authority, and the prohibition of entrapment has caused legal uncertainty and differences in interpretation among law enforcement officials. As a result, there is a disparity in court decisions, as seen in the Calang District Court Decision Number 18/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Cag which assesses the act of undercover buying as a form of investigator engineering even though elements of criminal acts have been proven. This study aims to explain and analyze the legal basis for the use of undercover buy investigation techniques by Indonesian Police Investigators in the Indonesian legal system as well as explain and examine the legal consequences arising from the application of undercover buy investigation techniques in narcotics crimes. This research is a normative juridical research with a legislative and conceptual approach. Data were analyzed qualitatively through the study of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials using legal interpretation techniques. The results of the study show that the Indonesian National Police Investigators are authorized to use the undercover buy technique based on the Narcotics Law and internal police policies. This authority is an attribution authority supported by police discretion, but it has not been supported by detailed implementation arrangements so that it has the potential to cause legal uncertainty. In addition, the use of undercover buy affects the validity of evidence in narcotics cases. If carried out according to procedures, the results can be used as valid evidence, while implementation that is not in accordance with procedures has the potential to cause procedural defects, invalidity of evidence, and human rights violations in the form of case engineering or entrapment. The suggestion of this study is the need for stricter regulation of undercover buying techniques through clear operational standards, limits of authority, and prevention of entrapment, accompanied by increased professionalism of investigators and internal supervision, and each implementation must be based on written orders to ensure legal certainty and the validity of evidence.
Orderly, efficient, transparent, and accountable local financial management requires consistency between the General Cost Standards and the Regional Unit Price Standards as references in planning and implementing the Regional Revenue and Expenditure Budget (APBD). In practice, discrepancies between these standards still occur and may create legal and governance problems. This study aims to analyze the inconsistency between the General Cost Standards of the Regional Government in Aceh and the Regional Unit Price Standards, and to formulate synchronization efforts based on state financial law. The research uses a normative legal method with statutory, conceptual, and analytical approaches through qualitative analysis of primary and secondary legal materials. The findings show that inconsistencies between the two standards may constitute abuse of authority, as the General Cost Standards, as a subordinate norm, must not conflict with the higher-ranking Regional Unit Price Standards. These inconsistencies include exceeding cost limits and adding expenditure components not regulated in the Regional Unit Price Standards, as identified by the State Audit Agency (BPK). Synchronization can be achieved by strengthening legal review, optimizing facilitation of local legal products, applying evidence-based budgeting, and improving the capacity of local financial management officials.
This study investigates the relationship between immigration and crime in Europe, a subject often central to legal and political debates yet rarely tested with comprehensive cross-national evidence. Using Eurostat data on police-recorded offenses disaggregated by the International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes (ICCS) and annual immigration inflows, we construct a balanced panel of 33 European countries covering 2008-2023. Crimes are grouped into five clusters: property, violent, sexual, drug-related, and other, to capture both high-volume and politically sensitive offense categories. The analysis proceeds in two stages. First, descriptive statistics, correlations, and scatterplots suggest moderate positive associations between immigration and property crime, while sexual and violent crimes appear weakly correlated with migration flows. However, these patterns largely reflect population size and reporting practices rather than causal effects. Second, fixed-effects panel regressions, lagged models, and eventinteraction designs are applied to test whether immigration drives crime once country-specific and temporal heterogeneity are controlled. Across all clusters, immigration coefficients are statistically insignificant, including during two major migration shocks: the 2015 refugee crisis and the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war. The only significant change observed is a weakening association between immigration and sexual offenses after 2015. These findings challenge securitisation discourses that link migration to criminality and underscore the importance of evidence-based policymaking. They demonstrate that immigration does not structurally increase crime at the macro-European level, even under crisis conditions, and highlight the mediating role of legal frameworks and integration regimes in sustaining public safety.
The enactment of Indonesia's Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Code of Criminal Procedure (KUHAP 2025), effective January 2, 2026, introduces a paradigmatic shift in the coordination between investigators and public prosecutors: Article 58 mandates active coordination from the investigation stage, fundamentally departing from the sequential-passive model of the former KUHAP, while Article 70 imposes a strict seven-day deadline for indictment drafting after case files are declared complete. This study examines two interconnected questions: (1) how the legal framework governing investigator–prosecutor coordination is structured under KUHAP 2025 and related legislation; and (2) how that framework is implemented in practice at the Purwakarta District Prosecutor's Office. A normative–empirical mixed-method design was employed, integrating statutory, conceptual, and case-study approaches. Data were gathered through in-depth interviews with prosecutors and investigators at Purwakarta District Prosecutor's Office and Purwakarta Police Resort, case document analysis, and field observation. The theoretical framework combines Lawrence M. Friedman's Legal System Theory and Soerjono Soekanto's Law Enforcement Theory. Findings reveal that KUHAP 2025 delivers substantial normative advancement yet harbours three critical regulatory gaps: the absence of binding technical protocols for implementing mandatory active coordination, the lack of uniform and measurable case-file completeness standards, and no formal mechanism for resolving institutional disagreements on legal interpretation. On the ground, coordination at Purwakarta still operates under the old sequential-passive pattern despite the new law: case-file returns (P-19) remain frequent, driven primarily by absent expert testimony, insufficient factual narration in examination records, and mismatches between charged articles and legal facts. A Friedman–Soekanto diagnostic reveals simultaneous dysfunction across all three legal system components substance, structure, and legal culture with the entrenched 'waiting culture' between the police and the prosecution identified as the most resistant obstacle to reform.
Drawing on 229,104 first-instance judgments for intentional injury in China from 2013 to 2021, this study examines the relationship between gender and sentencing outcomes by integrating Focal Concerns Theory and Double Deviance Theory. The empirical results show that, after controlling for case severity, statutory and discretionary sentencing circumstances, individual defendant characteristics, regional macro-level environments, and court and year fixed effects, female defendants receive significantly lower punishment intensity than their male counterparts, with an average reduction in baseline sentence length of approximately 13.9%. This gender disparity is not uniform but exhibits notable conditionality. In ordinary injury cases, the female advantage is more likely to emerge in combination with mitigating factors such as guilty pleas and confessions. As educational attainment increases and regional gender norms become more conservative, the sentencing advantage for women relative to men diminishes. This advantage is also more pronounced among defendants with urban household registration (hukou). Robustness checks further indicate that these findings hold not only for composite punishment intensity but also for the binary incarceration decision and the length of actual prison terms, and remain reasonably robust to potential omitted variable bias. Overall, the study suggests that genderbased sentencing disparities in Chinese intentional injury cases are better understood as a form of conditional and situational gendered leniency rather than a universal, one-directional "female privilege." This finding helps to reframe the understanding of sentencing disparities in the Chinese context from the perspective of interactions between judicial discretion and gender norms.
The Wali Nanggroe Institution (WNI) is a distinctive institution of Aceh established as a consequence of the implementation of asymmetric decentralization through the granting of special autonomy status within the framework of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. Its existence is legally recognized under Law Number 11 of 2006 on the Governance of Aceh, which defines it as an independent customary leadership institution operating outside the formal structure of regional government. Nevertheless, the regulation of the Wali Nanggroe Institution under Aceh Qanun Number 2 of 2023 continues to raise legal concerns regarding its independence, functional boundaries, scope of authority, and institutional relationship with the Aceh Government. This study aims to examine the compatibility of the regulatory framework governing the Wali Nanggroe Institution with the principles of asymmetric decentralization and to assess the juridical implications of its existence, independence, and authority within Indonesia’s constitutional and regional governance system. Employing a normative juridical research method, the study adopts statutory, conceptual, and historical approaches through an extensive review of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings indicate that the regulatory framework of the Wali Nanggroe Institution generally conforms to the principles of asymmetric decentralization, as it reflects the State’s recognition of Aceh’s distinct historical, cultural, religious, and socio-political characteristics through the establishment of a unique institution endowed with special functions and powers. However, several normative issues remain unresolved, particularly concerning institutional independence, the delineation of functions, and the scope of authority, which may create overlaps with the competencies of the Aceh Government. The study further reveals that the Wali Nanggroe Institution possesses a sui generis character as a customary institution unique to Aceh, situated outside the formal structure of regional government while simultaneously playing a strategic role in safeguarding the implementation of Aceh’s special status and privileges. Accordingly, amendments to Aceh Qanun Number 2 of 2023 are necessary to provide clearer limitations on the institution’s functions, independence, and authority, thereby ensuring legal certainty, fostering harmonious institutional relations, and strengthening the implementation of asymmetric decentralization in accordance with the principles of the rule of law
