Through the mega-corruption case of the tin trade, the state demonstrated the existence of a de facto asset recovery regime. Although the legal instruments used were fragmented—a partial combination of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), the Corruption Law (Tipikor), and the Money Laundering Law (TPPU)—their execution in the field proved capable of recovering assets amounting to nearly Rp1 trillion through the auction of confiscated goods from one of the main actors, Harvey Moeis. This study analyzes this phenomenon using the triangle with an axis theory, reconstructed through the institutional synergy of the Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK), the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the Prosecutor's Office, and the Police. This theory is used to examine how fragmented law enforcement collaboration without a single law can still produce massive asset recovery output. Using normative legal research methods and a sociological legal approach, this article assesses the extent to which this "patchwork" law enforcement can effectively recover state losses while severing the financial lifeblood of structured corruption networks. The research findings show that while de facto effective at the downstream actor asset execution level through the power of financial intelligence data integration, this fragmented regime still has fundamental limitations in reaching and crippling intellectual dandies at the upstream level without a unified, independent asset forfeiture regulation.
Corruption in the natural resources sector constitutes an extraordinary crime that causes significant financial losses to the state as well as extensive ecological and social impacts. Within the Indonesian positive legal system, the recovery of state losses is accommodated through an additional criminal sanction in the form of substitute money, as regulated under the Anti-Corruption Law. This study aims to analyze the normative construction of substitute money sanctions, judicial considerations in corruption cases involving tin mining and Harvey Moeis, and their effectiveness within the framework of asset recovery. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory and case approaches. The findings indicate that, normatively, substitute money serves as an imperative instrument for restoring state losses. However, in practice, it remains positioned as a subordinate sanction to imprison. The existence of subsidiary imprisonment and limitations in asset tracing have reduced the effectiveness of recovery efforts. The novelty of this research lies in its conceptual reconstruction that positions substitute money as a primary sanction in corruption sentencing based on asset recovery, rather than merely an accessory punishment. This approach emphasizes the follow the money principle and value-based configuration as the central orientation for restoring state financial losses.
Indonesia has witnessed a persistent and alarming rise in divorce rates over the past decade, presenting a complex socio-legal challenge that intersects Islamic family law, state legislation, and judicial practice in the Religious Courts (Pengadilan Agama). This article undertakes a comprehensive socio-legal analysis of the factors driving this phenomenon, examining the normative legal framework governing marriage and divorce in Indonesia, the institutional role and limitations of the Religious Courts, the ineffectiveness of court-mandated mediation, gender dynamics in divorce petitions, and the broader socio-economic and cultural determinants of marital dissolution. Drawing on empirical data, judicial decisions, and a synthesis of recent scholarship, this article argues that the rising divorce rate in Indonesia is a multidimensional phenomenon that cannot be adequately explained by reference to any single cause. Rather, it reflects structural deficiencies in the legal system, socio-economic pressures, evolving gender consciousness, inadequate pre-marital preparation, and the persistent gap between the normative aspirations of Islamic family law and the realities of judicial practice. The article concludes with recommendations for legal reform and institutional strengthening aimed at reducing divorce rates while ensuring justice for all parties, particularly women and children.
This article examines judicial politics in reconstructing Indonesia’s simultaneous regional head election design. The issue arises from the unstable constitutional position of regional head elections, which have moved between the regional government regime and the broader electoral regime. Using normative legal research with statutory, case, and conceptual approaches, this article analyses the 1945 Constitution, election and regional election laws, and Constitutional Court decisions, particularly Decisions No. 072-073/PUU-II/2004, 97/PUU-XI/2013, 55/PUU-XVII/2019, 85/PUU-XX/2022, and 135/PUU-XXII/2024. The article finds that the Constitutional Court has not merely acted as a negative legislator, but has also shaped constitutional parameters for electoral design through its jurisprudence. Decision No. 135/PUU-XXII/2024 represents a decisive shift by separating national elections from regional elections and positioning regional head elections within the architecture of regional elections. This reconstruction requires harmonisation between election and regional election laws, institutional strengthening of electoral bodies, and a tiered electoral justice system. The article contributes to constitutional election law by framing regional head election reform as a matter of judicially shaped democratic design.
This study aims to analyze the comparison of dispute resolution mechanisms in the Katarungang Pambarangay system in the Philippines with the concept of restorative justice in Indonesia, as well as assess the effectiveness of both in resolving community disputes. This study uses normative legal methods with statutory approaches, conceptual approaches, and comparative approaches. The results of the study show that the Katarungang Pambarangay system regulated in Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) is a community-based mechanism that is mandatory and structured through the stages of mediation, conciliation, and arbitration by the Tagapamayapa Board. Meanwhile, restorative justice in Indonesia is an integrated approach in the formal criminal justice system based on Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Code, which is implemented through the authority to terminate investigations and prosecutions. In terms of effectiveness, both systems show positive results in dispute resolution. Katarungang Pambarangay has proven to be effective in increasing community participation and reducing the burden on the courts, while restorative justice in Indonesia has shown a significant increase in the number of case settlements, victim satisfaction, and the potential to suppress recidivism. The main difference lies in the nature of obligations and implementing actors, where the Philippines emphasizes the role of the community, while Indonesia relies on law enforcement officials. The study concludes that both systems have their advantages and that the integration between community-based approaches and state institutional support can be an ideal model for more effective and equitable dispute resolution.
