Elections are held periodically to select national leaders and legislative representatives who are expected to effectively carry out their constitutional and democratic mandates. Indonesia’s 2024 general election presented both new challenges and opportunities, particularly as electoral competition increasingly expanded into digital spaces. The growing reliance on digital platforms has transformed conventional campaign strategies and encouraged candidates and political actors to adopt emerging technologies to communicate with voters, disseminate political messages, and mobilize public support. In this context, artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as an increasingly important instrument for conducting electoral campaigns in more innovative, targeted, and efficient ways. Nevertheless, the use of AI in electoral processes also raises significant legal concerns, particularly regarding transparency, accountability, personal data protection, the dissemination of AI-generated content, and the potential manipulation of information and voter preferences. Accordingly, the development of an electoral system involving AI requires a coherent and integrated legal framework. This article argues that closer regulatory alignment is required among Indonesia’s Election Law, the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, and the Personal Data Protection Law. Regulatory fragmentation and overlapping provisions may create legal uncertainty concerning the responsibilities of candidates, political parties, digital platforms, and other actors using AI during elections. Harmonization among these regulatory frameworks is therefore essential to establish clear standards of accountability, transparency, and personal data protection throughout AI-assisted electoral processes, particularly in political campaigning and other technology-mediated electoral activities. Ultimately, an integrated regulatory approach is necessary to ensure that technological innovation can be accommodated without undermining legal certainty, electoral integrity, and the fundamental principles of democratic elections.
This study examines the paradigmatic contribution of Prophetic social science to Indonesian law enforcement through the integration of humanization, liberation, and transcendence as the core values of prophetic jurisprudence. The research responds to the persistent dominance of legal positivism in Indonesia, which tends to separate law from ethical and spiritual dimensions, resulting in procedural legalism that often neglects substantive justice and human dignity. Using a normative legal research method with philosophical and conceptual approaches, this study analyzes legislation, legal doctrines, judicial principles, and scholarly works concerning prophetic law and Indonesian legal reform. The findings demonstrate that prophetic jurisprudence offers a transformative legal paradigm grounded in Islamic ethical teachings derived from the Qur’an and Hadith. Humanization is reflected in the development of restorative justice and rehabilitation-oriented correctional systems that prioritize human dignity over retributive punishment. Liberation is manifested through efforts to combat structural injustice, strengthen transparency, and implement digital justice systems aimed at preventing corruption and abuse of power. Transcendence is embodied in the constitutional and philosophical foundations of Indonesian law, particularly through Pancasila and legal norms emphasizing divine accountability and moral consciousness in law enforcement. This study concludes that prophetic jurisprudence provides a comprehensive alternative to positivistic legal frameworks by integrating moral, social, and spiritual dimensions into legal practice. The prophetic paradigm contributes significantly to the development of a more humane, just, and transformative legal system in Indonesia, capable of harmonizing legal certainty with substantive justice and ethical responsibility.
The integration of AI into judicial systems represents a consequential and underregulated transformation in modern governance. This study is anchored in the accountability gap framework, which argues that autonomous systems create a gap between human agency and legal responsibility, and in the principle of due process, which requires procedural compliance and protection of fundamental rights in AI-mediated decisions. The study evaluates the opportunities and risks associated with AI in legal document automation, case management, predictive analytics, and decision-making. The study analyzes the ethical, legal, and practical challenges AI poses to judicial systems, including bias, accountability, transparency, and data protection. A qualitative methodology, including doctrinal analysis and document review, examined legislation, case law, and institutional frameworks, supported by empirical illustrations. The findings highlight efficiency gains, improved access to justice, and enhanced analytical capabilities. In response to the identified risks, the research recommends establishing ethical oversight boards, maintaining AI transparency logs, developing hybrid human-AI decision-making frameworks, and implementing robust legislative mechanisms. AI offers unprecedented advances in case management, improved legal research, and more consistent analytical support for judicial decision-making. Its deployment must be carefully and strictly regulated. The paper concludes that efficiency and fairness are not inherently opposed, but that realizing both requires moving beyond technical fixes toward structural legal reform.
The concept of hardship clauses is not explicitly recognized in the Civil Code. In practice, Indonesian courts rely on force majeure and good faith (Article 1338 paragraph (3) of the Civil Code). Nevertheless, the development of hardship clauses in business contracts play an important role in providing flexibility and fairness to the parties involved when facing significant and unexpected changes in circumstances. The emergence of hardship clauses is driven by the dynamics of global business contracts and their continued development, which require a breakthrough system based on humanitarian values, without being constricted to legal positivism. From a prophetic legal perspective, the principles of justice (al-'adl), public welfare (maslahah), and protection of the rights of the weaker party serve as key elements in the drafting and implementation of such clauses. This article examines hardship clauses in the context of Indonesian law using a normative and conceptual approach based on prophetic values. The results of the study show that regulations regarding hardship clauses are not regulated in contract law in Indonesia.that should exist in accordance with prophetic legal values: humanization, liberation, and transcendence. On the other hand, hardship clauses, when viewed from an prophetic law perspective, demonstrate harmony, indicating that business relationships are not solely concerned with muamalah (transactional transactions) but aim to achieve the essence of divine values. This study recommends responsive regulatory reforms in the form of hardship clauses to ensure a balanced distribution of rights and obligations among parties in business contracts. The findings emphasize the importance of integrating prophetic values into contract law to create a more humane, responsive, and just legal system.
Historical ties between Indonesia and Palestine underpin Indonesia's steadfast commitment to supporting Palestine's right to independence. The Al-Aqsa Flood incident on October 7, 2023, followed by Israel’s massive invasion of Palestine, escalated the conflict in Palestine exponentially. This conflict has drawn the attention of the world, including Indonesia, to drastically intensify its diplomacy in supporting Palestine’s independence. Indonesia has undertaken a "Diplomacy Jihad" by actively defending Palestinian rights through various United Nations forums such as the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), and others. This normative-empirical research critically evaluates the effectiveness of Indonesia’s diplomatic efforts and the obstacles it faces in advocating for Palestinian independence within the UN framework post-October 7, 2023. Our hypothesis is that Indonesia's diplomacy at the UN generally represents an effective form of advocacy in this "Diplomacy Jihad," although critical challenges hinder the potential for an even stronger performance, a trend that is worsening in 2026.
