SIGn Jurnal Hukum

Village Fund Pathology and Supervisory Dysfunction: A Legal Analysis in Boalemo Regency

2025-10-01T10:15:11+00:00

Indonesia’s Village Fund policy faces a serious challenge in the form of systematic financial misuse, which is exacerbated by a weak internal oversight mechanism. This research aims to analyze the modus operandi of Village Fund misuse and the institutional dysfunction of the Inspectorate in performing its supervisory functions in Boaloemo Regency. Using an empirical juridical approach and a qualitative study design, primary data were collected through in-depth interviews, observation, and questionnaires, supported by secondary data from a document analysis. The results indicate a governance pathology at the village level, manifested through authoritative deviation, financial manipulation, and administrative engineering. This condition is triggered by a lack of participation and transparency. Furthermore, the study finds that this pathology is directly caused by the dysfunction of the Inspectorate, which suffers from structural constraints including resource deficits (budget and auditors), geographical challenges, an excessive workload, and a lack of sanctioning authority that blunts the deterrence effect. It is concluded that a strong causal relationship exists, wherein the failure of the internal oversight function is the determining factor that creates a permissive environment for widespread misappropriation. Therefore, three strategic policies are recommended: the institutional capacity building of the Inspectorate, the revitalization of participatory oversight mechanisms at the village level, and the enhancement of competency standards for village apparatus human resources.

The Paradox of Implementing Restorative Justice at the Investigation Stage: A Systematic Weakening of Sentence Enhancement for Repeat Offenders

2025-10-01T10:15:11+00:00

The progressive adoption of restorative justice at the investigation stage has created the unintended consequence of systematically weakening law enforcement against repeat offenders. This study aims to analyze how the normative framework of restorative justice, particularly Police Regulation Number 8 of 2021, and its field implementation create a juridical gap that directly neutralizes the sentence enhancement mechanism. Employing juridical-normative and juridical-empirical approaches, this study confronts the ideal legal text (das sollen) with the practical reality (das sein) at the Criminal Investigation Unit of the Sumedang Regency Police. Key findings indicate that the regulation’s definition of recidivism, which is exclusively tied to a “court judgment,” renders restorative settlement records—which are purely administrative in nature—devoid of juridical evidentiary force. Consequently, offenders who repeatedly utilize the restorative path will always be considered first-time offenders. This condition opens a dangerous loophole for impunity and the weakening of the deterrent effect. This study concludes that without a policy reconstruction that grants limited legal status to restorative records and integrates them into a unified criminal justice data system, the noble goal of restorative justice risks sacrificing the principles of legal certainty and public protection. Therefore, urgent regulatory reform is necessary to synchronize the objective of restoration with the imperative of effective law enforcement against repeat offenders.

Judicial Law-Finding in the Criminal Justice System: Harmonizing Legal Certainty and Substantive Justice

2025-10-01T10:15:11+00:00

The enactment of Law Number 1 of 2023 marks a fundamental paradigm shift in the Indonesian criminal justice system, prioritizing substantive justice over formal legal certainty. This shift radically transforms the role of a Judge from a mere mouthpiece of the law (bouche de la loi) to an active law-finder (rechtsvinder). However, the practice of law-finding in the field remains largely ad hoc and intuitive, creating a risk of inconsistency. Addressing this urgency, this research aims to formulate a systematic and accountable ideal concept of judicial law-finding to serve as an operational guide for Judges. Using a normative juridical method that integrates a statute approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach to key court decisions, this study conducts a methodological reconstruction of the practice of judicial discretion. The primary finding is the formulation of a “judicial compass” built upon five mutually reinforcing fundamental principles: (1) proportionality, (2) transparency and accountability, (3) judicial consistency, (4) social responsiveness, and (5) dynamic equilibrium. These five principles collectively transform the law-finding process into a structured and rational approach. Thus, this ideal concept contributes both theoretically and practically by offering a coherent framework for Judges to execute the mandate of Law Number 1 of 2023, enabling them to harmonize legal values justly and measurably in every decision.

A Critical Analysis of Corporate Criminal Liability in Law Number 1 of 2023

2025-10-13T01:20:46+00:00

Although the codification of corporate criminal liability in Law Number 1 of 2023 marks a paradigmatic advancement in Indonesian criminal law, its implementation is overshadowed by normative vulnerabilities that could undermine legal certainty. This research aims to critically analyze the architecture of corporate criminal liability, as regulated in Articles 45 through 50 of Law Number 1 of 2023, to identify its inherent conceptual and structural problems. Using a normative legal research method supported by statutory and conceptual approaches, as well as systematic interpretation techniques, this study dissects each layer of the norms that construct this liability mechanism. The findings indicate that Law Number 1 of 2023 has progressively expanded the definition of criminal law subjects and the scope of perpetrators to include beneficial owners, while also formulating pragmatic criteria for corporate fault. However, behind this progress, two fundamental problems were identified. First is the normative ambiguity arising from open-ended phrases such as “or that which is equated to it,” which risks creating disparities in judicial decisions. Second is a structural disharmony reflected in the functional redundancy between Articles 47 and 49 of Law Number 1 of 2023. It is concluded that the effectiveness of this entire corporate criminal liability framework will heavily depend on the active role of the judiciary as a law-finder (rechtsvinder) to clarify normative obscurities. Therefore, the issuance of technical guidelines by the Supreme Court is an urgent necessity to ensure consistent and just implementation.

Normative Reconstruction of Asset Forfeiture: A Legal Pathway Following Demise of Corruption Suspects

2025-10-14T18:28:59+00:00

The death of a corruption suspect before a final and legally binding court judgment creates a fundamental juridical paradox that paralyzes the Indonesian criminal justice system. On one hand, the state loses its instruments for recovering losses due to its reliance on the conviction-based asset forfeiture paradigm. On the other hand, seized assets are trapped in a state of uncertainty, injuring the public’s sense of justice while simultaneously threatening the civil rights of the heirs. This research aims to analyze this normative vacuum (rechtsvacuüm) critically and, as its culmination, to formulate a concrete, implementable legal reconstruction of law as it ought to be (ius constituendum). Using a normative legal research method grounded in statutory, conceptual, and critical comparative approaches, this study finds that the current juridical dead end is at odds with Radbruch’s three basic legal values: justice, certainty, and utility. As a solution, this research proposes a paradigm shift toward the NCB asset forfeiture model, operationalized through a procedural blueprint in the form of a special civil lawsuit. Based on a critical synthesis of international practices, a hybrid model is designed—termed the “Civil-Based Asset Status Examination”—which adopts the flexibility of the civil law tradition while strictly guaranteeing due process of law. The final result is a concrete normative formulation capable of reconciling the state’s interest in asset recovery with the protection of human rights, while simultaneously offering a progressive step in the renewal of criminal procedure law in Indonesia.

The Qualification of Jarimah Ta’zir for Child Exploitation: A Case Study of Forced Labor at the Muara Parlampungan Gold Mine

2025-10-15T01:48:19+00:00

This research examines the phenomenon of child exploitation in the informal gold mining sector of Muara Parlampungan Village. This practice is opposed to the principles of child protection in Islam. Amid the ideal narrative of children as a divine trust whose dignity must be preserved, the on-the-ground reality reveals the systematic coercion of school-aged children, who are forced to work in high-risk conditions to support their families’ economy. The purpose of this study is to analyze this practice from the perspective of Islamic criminal law (fiqh jinayah) and to formulate a religio-legal (syar’i) qualification for the act. Using a juridical-empirical approach and a qualitative method, primary data were collected through observation and in-depth interviews with child victims, religious figures, and community leaders. The results reveal that children are forced to work 12-hour days in a hazardous environment. These conditions constantly threaten their physical and psychological safety, resulting in the deprivation of their fundamental right to education and inducing deep trauma with the potential for lifelong effects. An analysis based on the higher objectives of Islamic law (Maqashid al-Syariah) proves that this act directly undermines three fundamental objectives: the preservation of life (hifz al-nafs), the intellect (hifz al-‘aql), and progeny (hifz al-nasl). Based on this systematic harm, the study concludes that this practice of child coercion qualifies as a criminal offense (jarimah) falling under the category of a discretionary punishment (ta’zir). This qualification provides the state with full legitimacy to undertake legal intervention. The research recommends a hybrid law enforcement model that combines rehabilitative sanctions for parents with comprehensive restorative programs for child victims to break the cycle of exploitation.

The Dialectic of Agrarian Justice: A Jurisprudential Analysis of Unlawful Acts in Land Disputes from the District Court to Judicial Review

2025-10-20T14:16:15+00:00

Inconsistency in court decisions on agrarian disputes presents a crucial problem that tests the balance between formal legal certainty and substantive justice. This research aims to conduct an in-depth analysis of the application of the elements of an unlawful act and the dialectic of judicial reasoning (ratio decidendi). The analysis is conducted in the context of an ownership dispute over a 14,000 m² parcel of land in East Kutai. This case traversed four judicial tiers, from the District Court to the Judicial Review at the Supreme Court. Employing a normative legal research method through a case study approach, a comparative-qualitative analysis of each court decision is performed to dissect the legal logic underlying the dynamics of the contradictory verdicts. The findings indicate that the Supreme Court, in its role as the judex juris, ultimately affirmed the superiority of material truth. This truth, proven by actual and good-faith physical possession, was deemed superior to the legal formalism embodied in substantially flawed ownership documents. The substantive-justice-oriented court decision of First Instance was annulled at the formalistic Appeal level, only to be restored by the Supreme Court at the Cassation level and subsequently upheld in the Judicial Review stage. It is concluded that the final decision in this case not only provides concrete legal protection for the good-faith land possessor but also contributes significantly to jurisprudence as an important precedent that reinforces the judiciary’s orientation toward achieving substantive justice in the resolution of agrarian disputes in Indonesia.

Legal Protection for Copyright Holders against Unauthorized Song Use: A Study of Case Number 92/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Copyright/2024/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst

2025-10-28T10:14:28+00:00

Copyright protection for musical works is a vital aspect of the music industry. However, the practice of using songs commercially without the creator’s authorization remains a significant problem that violates both economic and moral rights. This research aims to analyze the scope of legal protection for song copyrights under Law Number 28 of 2014 and the challenges of its enforcement. It also critically examines the Panel of Judges’ legal reasoning in Case Number 92/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Copyright/2024/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst concerning the determination of the Performer’s liability and the application of civil sanctions. This normative legal research employs a qualitative analysis of primary and secondary legal materials, drawing on statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. The findings indicate that although Law Number 28 of 2014 provides a robust basis for protection, various enforcement challenges persist. Case Number 92/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Copyright/2024/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst affirmed the occurrence of copyright infringement by the Performer. The ruling found the Performer liable despite the presence of an organizer. It also imposed economic damage sanctions by referencing parameters within criminal provisions. However, the court rejected the claim for moral rights damages for lack of proof. This case has implications for affirming the Performer’s liability and the paradigm for imposing sanctions in song copyright disputes. It also promotes increased legal awareness within the Indonesian music industry.

A Juridical Demarcation: Reconstructing the Proof of Mens Rea to Differentiate Policy and Corruption by Public Officials

2025-10-29T14:06:40+00:00

The enforcement of anti-corruption law in Indonesia confronts a fundamental paradox. The vigorous campaign to eradicate corruption often results in an erosion of legal certainty and an increased risk of policy criminalization. This issue stems from the distortion and inconsistent application of the principle of a guilty mind (mens rea), as judicial practice frequently equates state financial loss or procedural errors with malicious intent. This research aims to reconstruct the principle of proving mens rea by proposing a clear and operational demarcation framework. Using a normative legal research method that integrates the statute, conceptual, and case study approaches, this study analyzes data through systematic and teleological interpretation, culminating in deductive reasoning. The findings indicate that jurisprudence empirically confirms a dangerous blurring of these concepts. As a solution, this study formulates a framework that strictly differentiates among administrative error, policy error, and intentional corruption. The fundamental line of demarcation among these categories is the presence of a valid and convincingly proven mens rea, defined as the intent to enrich oneself or others unlawfully. The primary contribution of this study is to provide a juridical parameter to enhance legal certainty and protect the legitimate discretionary space of public officials. Ultimately, this framework aims to restore criminal law to its function as a last resort (ultimum remedium), thereby making the fight against corruption more targeted, just, and legitimate.

Judicial Paradigm Clash: Comparative Analysis of the Application of the Anti-SLAPP Doctrine in the Protection of Environmental Activists

2025-11-06T12:14:26+00:00

The criminalization of environmental activists utilizing social media through Law Number 11 of 2008 has become a serious threat to public participation, demonstrably triggering inconsistencies in law enforcement. This research focuses on a critical analysis of the decisional disparity in the case of environmental activist Daniel Frits. Decision Number 14/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Jpa issued a criminal conviction, which was subsequently annulled entirely by Decision Number 374/Pid.Sus/2024/PT Smg, dismissing all charges against the defendant. Using a normative legal research method that integrates a statute approach and a case approach, this study performs an in-depth deconstruction and comparison of the legal reasoning (ratio decidendi) of both decisions. The results indicate that this decisional disparity stems from a fundamental clash between two conflicting judicial paradigms. The formalistic-positivistic paradigm adopted by the lower court was proven to have failed in applying the Anti-SLAPP doctrine. Conversely, the progressive-substantive paradigm embraced by the appellate court correctly affirmed the supremacy of activist immunity by applying Article 66 of Law Number 32 of 2009 as a justification defense, which nullified the criminal nature of the act. This finding indicates a fragility in the legal certainty for environmental activists, which is highly dependent on judges’ insight and courage. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate an ideal legal protection framework that does not merely rely on normative strength. This formulation also demands harmonization through the strengthening of institutional capacity and a cultural shift in law enforcement toward a greater orientation on substantive and ecological justice.

Corporate Liability of Ride-Hailing Services: An Analysis of Partnership Legal Fiction and the Reconstruction of Passenger Safety Regulation

2025-11-10T13:10:22+00:00

The rapid adoption of ride-hailing services in Indonesia is confronted by the problem of passenger safety vulnerability, stemming from normative regulatory insufficiency. The prevailing legal framework, comprising both the lex generalis (Law Number 22 of 2009) and the lex specialis (Ministerial Regulation Number 118 of 2018), is found to fail to provide a precise and operational mechanism for corporate liability. This failure creates a significant regulatory gap. This research aims to analyze the insufficiency of this legal framework, deconstruct the juridical implications of the “partnership” status, and construct an ideal, justice-based liability model. Employing a normative legal research (juridical-normative) method with statute, conceptual, and historical approaches, this study analyzes primary and secondary legal materials. The research findings indicate that this regulatory gap is exploited by application companies through the “partnership” construction. Substantively, this construction constitutes a legal fiction and a disguised employment relationship. This strategy is used to evade the doctrine of vicarious liability and systematically contributes to human error, which is the primary cause of accidents. This systematic contribution occurs through exploitative algorithmic management and the absence of fatigue management. Therefore, the novelty of this research is the proposition of a fundamental legal reconstruction. This reconstruction comprises two steps: imperatively affirming the legal status of application companies as “Transportation Service Providers,” and implementing four pillars of imperative liability mechanisms: comprehensive insurance, vehicle-worthiness standards, driver-welfare standards (including online-hour limits), and a rapid victim compensation mechanism.