Indonesian State Law Review (ISLRev)

Inter-religious Marriage in Indonesia: Pros and Cons in the Administrative and Constitutional Law

2024-02-17T00:18:11+07:00

Inter-religious marriage is a complex and multifaceted issue in Indonesia, a diverse nation with a majority Muslim population. This paper explores the legal landscape surrounding inter-religious marriages in Indonesia, focusing on both the administrative and constitutional dimensions. The study aims to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the existing legal framework governing inter-religious marriages, shedding light on the implications for individuals, families, and society. The administrative aspects of inter-religious marriage involve the bureaucratic processes and legal requirements that couples must navigate to register their unions. This paper examines the administrative challenges faced by inter-religious couples, exploring issues such as documentation, consent, and the role of government institutions in facilitating or impeding such marriages. On the constitutional front, the study delves into the legal principles and rights enshrined in Indonesia's constitution that pertain to inter-religious marriages. The analysis considers the constitutional guarantees of religious freedom, equality, and non-discrimination, as well as potential conflicts with other constitutional provisions. The pros and cons of inter-religious marriages are discussed, considering the social, cultural, and economic implications for individuals and their communities. Positive aspects such as fostering social cohesion, cultural diversity, and personal freedom are contrasted with challenges like societal resistance, legal complexities, and potential impacts on children within these unions. Furthermore, the paper examines recent developments and debates surrounding legislative reforms related to inter-religious marriages in Indonesia. It evaluates the potential for legal changes to address existing challenges and enhance the protection of individual rights while respecting the diverse religious landscape of the nation. In conclusion, this paper offers a comprehensive analysis of inter-religious marriage in Indonesia, exploring both administrative and constitutional aspects. By presenting a nuanced understanding of the pros and cons, it contributes to the ongoing discourse on legal reforms and social attitudes towards inter-religious unions, aiming to promote a more inclusive and equitable legal framework for all citizens.

Granting Clemency to Antasari Azhar as the Object of a State Administrative Law Dispute

2024-02-17T11:31:54+07:00

This study provides an overview of the state administrative law dispute surrounding the granting of clemency to Antasari Azhar, a prominent figure involved in a high-profile legal case. The controversy stems from the exercise of executive power and the application of clemency within the framework of state administrative law. Antasari Azhar, a former Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) chairman, was convicted in a notable corruption case. Subsequently, his request for clemency sparked debates, legal challenges, and concerns about the integrity of the administrative process. This study delves into the legal dimensions of Antasari Azhar’s clemency case, examining the constitutional and administrative law aspects involved. Key issues include the discretionary powers of the executive in granting clemency, the potential influence of political considerations, and the adherence to legal procedures during the decision-making process. The research aims to shed light on the broader implications of this case for the rule of law, the separation of powers, and the accountability of public officials. Through a comprehensive analysis of relevant legal frameworks, court decisions, and scholarly perspectives, this study seeks to contribute to the understanding of the complex interplay between executive powers and the legal principles governing clemency in the context of state administrative law. Furthermore, it addresses the implications of such disputes for the overall legal and political landscape, emphasizing the importance of transparency, due process, and accountability in the exercise of executive clemency.

Polemic on the Legitimacy of Proof of E-Court Trial at the State Administrative Court (Harmonization of Legal Courts and Information Technology in the Covid-19 Pandemic Era)

2024-02-17T13:31:10+07:00

Amid the global upheaval caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, this study navigates the challenges presented by the perilous situation, focusing specifically on the transformation of legal proceedings. The pandemic, posing risks to public health, compelled the imposition of widespread restrictions, limiting various community activities and direct interactions. This shift had profound implications for the justice system, prompting a departure from the conventional practice of open and in-person court proceedings. In response to these unprecedented circumstances, the legal arena saw the emergence of online courts, commonly known as e-courts, as an alternative to traditional court setups. The study seeks to critically examine the effectiveness and legitimacy of e-courts during this tumultuous period. Utilizing a literature study method, the research delves into relevant books and literature, emphasizing the collection of data to assess the harmony between legal court proceedings and information technology in the context of the pandemic. The primary goal is to scrutinize the polemics and challenges surrounding the implementation of e-courts, particularly in the State Administrative Court. As the study unfolds, it reveals a nuanced perspective on the harmonization of legal courts and information technology during the Covid-19 pandemic. The discussion extends to the legitimacy of proof in e-court trials, with a specific focus on the State Administrative Court. The analysis underscores the necessity of maintaining a balance between conventional and electronic trial methods to ensure a comprehensive and reliable legal system. In addition, the research contends that despite the convenience offered by e-courts, doubts persist regarding the legitimacy of evidence presented in electronic trials, particularly in the administrative context. The findings contribute valuable insights that can inform future legislative efforts, guiding the harmonization of legal courts and information technology. Ultimately, the study aims to foster the development of a robust legal framework that addresses the polemics surrounding e-court trials, enhancing their legitimacy and efficacy in the ongoing and post-pandemic era.

The Legitimacy of Letters as Evidence in the E-Litigation Proof System within the State Administrative Court

2024-02-19T09:26:17+07:00

This study delves into the legitimacy of employing letters as evidence within the E-Litigation Proof System at the State Administrative Court (PTUN) against the backdrop of the digital 4.0 era’s transformative influence. The Indonesian government's introduction of electronic justice (e-Litigation or e-Courts) marks a significant paradigm shift, fundamentally altering trial procedures at PTUN. Employing a juridical-normative research method with a qualitative nature, this investigation utilizes conceptual and historical approaches to scrutinize the implications of the e-Litigation system. Secondary data sources, encompassing regulations, literature, and relevant documents, form the basis for analyzing the profound changes in courtroom proceedings and their impact on validating documentary evidence. The findings underscore a pivotal transition from traditional to electronic trials, fostering the electronic submission and exchange of documents. However, the implementation of the e-Litigation evidentiary system has sparked discussions, particularly concerning the legitimacy and challenges associated with proving letters as evidence, particularly in the initial stages of the process. This exploration of the legitimacy of letters as evidence within the e-Litigation context contributes significantly to the ongoing discourse on the modernization of legal proceedings. It sheds light on the evolving nature of evidentiary practices in the digital age, specifically within the State Administrative Court. The study thus offers valuable insights into the intersection of technology and justice, providing a nuanced understanding of the complexities surrounding the utilization of electronic evidence in contemporary legal systems.

Interpretation of the Expansion of the Application of the Authority of the State Administrative Court in Adjudicating Factual Legal Actions of the Government

2024-02-19T23:20:17+07:00

The evolution of the State Administrative Court’s authority in adjudicating factual legal actions involving government entities represents a dynamic facet of administrative law. This paper aims to explore and interpret the nuanced expansion of the State Administrative Court’s jurisdiction in handling cases related to factual legal actions initiated by the government. Through an in-depth analysis of legal precedents, legislative developments, and judicial interpretations, the study navigates the evolving landscape of administrative law. The paper delineates the historical context and legal frameworks that have shaped the State Administrative Court's jurisdiction, emphasizing its pivotal role in ensuring governmental accountability. It investigates the implications of the broadened scope of authority on the court's adjudicative processes and the overall legal landscape. Furthermore, the research scrutinizes key cases to illustrate how the court’s expanded jurisdiction impacts the resolution of factual legal actions involving government entities. By examining the interplay between legislative intent, judicial reasoning, and practical implications, the paper provides insights into the complexities and challenges associated with this expanded mandate. The findings underscore the significance of a judicious balance between the State Administrative Court’s authority and the imperative to maintain government efficacy. Additionally, the paper contributes to the ongoing discourse on administrative law by offering a comprehensive interpretation of the expanding role of the State Administrative Court in the adjudication of factual legal actions initiated by the government. In conclusion, this paper enhances our understanding of the evolving dynamics within administrative law, shedding light on the implications and intricacies surrounding the State Administrative Court’s extended authority in addressing factual legal actions involving government entities.