This study examines the constitutional validity of the Sekolah Rakyat program as a state mechanism for fulfilling the right to education under Articles 31 and 34 of the 1945 Constitution of Indonesia. Despite the formal guarantee of tuition-free education, structural barriers—including subsistence costs, transportation expenses, and opportunity loss—continue to prevent economically marginalized groups from accessing education. This research employs a qualitative descriptive-analytical method using a constitutional law approach, supported by statutory, doctrinal, and jurisprudential analysis, including Constitutional Court Decision Number 3/PUU-XXII/2024. The findings reveal that Sekolah Rakyat, through its fully funded boarding school model, transforms abstract constitutional guarantees into substantive educational access by eliminating structural resource barriers that conventional free education policies fail to address. This study advances constitutional law scholarship by conceptualizing state-funded boarding education as an enforceable constitutional obligation rather than a discretionary social policy. However, the research also identifies critical risks related to institutional fragmentation, governance incoherence, and fiscal sustainability, which may undermine its constitutional function. Therefore, the study argues that comprehensive legal institutionalization, integrated governance, and sustainable public financing are essential to ensure the program’s permanence and effectiveness. This research provides theoretical and policy contributions by strengthening the legal framework for socio-economic rights protection and offering a model for embedding transformative education policies within binding constitutional obligations to achieve substantive equality and sustainable human capital development.

This study aims to critically examine how Law Number 4 of 2024 concerning the Welfare of Mothers and Children in the First Thousand Days of Life (KIA Law) reproduces gender bias against female workers through a law-and-gender-equality perspective. The problem raised is that several articles in the KIA Law perpetuate the domestication of women due to the minimal paternity leave provided and the lack of regulation of wage rights for workers who take paternity leave. This results in female workers being required to take full responsibility for the welfare of their children, while male workers are only minimally protected because they do not receive protection for their roles as fathers and husbands. The research method used is normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. This study shows that in Indonesia, there is a stereotype that men's roles are in the public sector and women's roles are in the domestic sector. Although many women currently play roles in the public sector, domestication still occurs, creating a dual role for women. The KIA Law has not yet addressed this issue. The design of paternity leave and unclear wage schemes during this leave in the KIA Law still reflects structural gender bias that encourages the domestication of women. Lack of support from men, which aligns with the role of men, leads women to choose to stop working after giving birth. This research provides a normative contribution to the development of gender-equality-based employment regulations and serves as the basis for recommendations for parental leave policy reform in Indonesia.

This study maps and analyzes the development of Indonesian business law research following the enactment of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation, which significantly reshaped the national regulatory landscape and generated extensive academic debate. Despite growing scholarly attention, there remains limited empirical evidence systematically examining thematic trends, influential publications, and emerging research directions in this field. Using a bibliometric approach, this study analyzes 187 Scopus-indexed publications published between 2021 and mid-2024. Bibliometric indicators, including citation analysis, keyword co-occurrence, and network visualization, were examined using VOSviewer to identify dominant themes, leading journals, and research clusters. The findings reveal that research has grown steadily, with fintech regulation, micro and small enterprise governance, halal business, and banking law emerging as dominant themes. The International Journal of Law and Management was identified as the most influential publication outlet. The analysis also highlights emerging scholarly attention to Perseroan Perorangan as a new legal entity introduced by the Job Creation Law, while areas such as consumer protection and insolvency remain underexplored. This study contributes to the literature by providing the first comprehensive bibliometric mapping of Indonesian business law research in the post-Job Creation Law era. The findings offer valuable insights for scholars, policymakers, and regulators in understanding research trajectories, identifying gaps, and supporting evidence-based legal development to enhance regulatory effectiveness and sustainable business governance in Indonesia.

This study aims to explain the construction of the Attorney General's Office's criminal law policies in accelerating Indonesia’s National Strategic Projects (PSN), analyze the reasons these policies have not yet been grounded in the value of justice, and propose a reconstruction model that embodies justice values. The prevention of corruption in PSN remains dominated by a penal (repressive) approach and lacks a balanced non-penal (preventive) strategy, despite the Attorney General's Office holding a central role as a law enforcement agency. This imbalance demonstrates the urgency of reconstructing criminal law policies to align with the principles of justice and effectiveness in corruption prevention. The research employs a legal-normative and legal-empirical method, drawing on Gustav Radbruch's Three Basic Values of Law Theory, Ultimum Remedium Theory, Social Cost Theory, and Criminal Law Reform Theory. The findings reveal that while the Attorney General's Office’s criminal law policy framework aims to ensure project compliance with the law and reduce corruption risks, supported by prosecutorial intelligence, it remains trapped in legal formalism, neglects substantive justice, and underutilizes non-penal measurs. The study concludes that comprehensive policy reconstruction is required through structural strengthening, substantive regulatory reform, and legal culture revitalization. The novelty of this research lies in proposing the inclusion of the Strategic Project Protection Team (PPS) within corruption prevention regulations, thereby institutionalizing the Attorney General’s preventive role and introducing a justice-based non-criminal policy framework to mitigate and recover state financial losses caused by corruption. Keywords: Attorney General’s Office; Criminal Law Reform; Gustav Radbruch; National Strategic Projects; Ultimum Remedium

This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of derden verzet as a legal protection mechanism for third parties in civil execution disputes in Indonesia and to assess its relevance to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 16 on peace, justice, and strong institutions. Employing normative legal research with a case approach, this article examines Decision No. 372/Pdt/2020/PT.Bdg and relevant procedural norms under the HIR/RBg framework, supported by doctrinal and human-rights-based justice literature. The findings show that derden verzet is conceptually designed to safeguard third-party property rights affected by final court judgments; however, its implementation remains constrained by procedural formalism, a heavy burden of proof, limited public awareness, and inadequate procedural safeguards in summons and evidentiary examination. In the analyzed case, the third party’s attempt to reclaim property rights was impeded despite indications that the transfer of rights occurred in the absence of good faith, demonstrating a gap between procedural compliance and substantive justice. This condition undermines legal certainty and weakens access to justice, contradicting the institutional objectives promoted by SDG Goal 16. The novelty of this study lies in repositioning derden verzet not merely as an extraordinary procedural remedy but as a substantive rights-protection instrument within a human-rights-oriented civil justice reform agenda, while identifying key normative deficiencies such as unclear standing requirements and undefined criteria of “harmed interests.” Accordingly, the study recommends clearer judicial guidelines and standardized procedural rules to strengthen third-party standing assessment, improve structured evidentiary review, and reduce excessive formalism to ensure more effective protection and a more accountable civil justice system.

This study aims to examine how war crimes are conceptualised and enforced within the framework of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and the Rome Statute by analysing the Israel–Palestine conflict as a prolonged and politically contested armed conflict in which serious violations against civilians persist with limited accountability. Using a normative legal research design, this article applies a statutory and case-based approach through doctrinal analysis of the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols, and the Rome Statute, supported by qualitative examination of ICC-related documents, United Nations reports, and verified secondary data to assess the implementation of core IHL principles, particularly distinction and proportionality. The findings demonstrate that recurrent violations committed by both parties are not primarily caused by normative gaps in international law, but rather by structural enforcement barriers, including the ICC’s jurisdictional and admissibility constraints, restricted access to evidence, lack of state cooperation, political interference, and selective enforcement through international institutions, especially the UN Security Council. These obstacles contribute to an enduring enforcement deficit that weakens civilian protection and perpetuates impunity in asymmetric and protracted conflicts. The novelty of this study lies in systematically linking fundamental IHL principles—distinction, proportionality, and the prohibition of excessive force—to their qualification as war crimes under Article 8 of the Rome Statute, while critically demonstrating how political realities and institutional dependence on state cooperation undermine the effectiveness of international criminal accountability mechanisms. This research highlights the urgent need to strengthen coordination among international institutions, enhance investigative access and evidentiary reliability, and promote more consistent and impartial enforcement strategies to ensure that IHL and international criminal law operate as effective deterrents and justice-delivering instruments in contemporary armed conflicts.

This study aims to analyze and formulate an optimized legal protection model for patients in telemedicine services in Indonesia by developing a blockchain-based therapeutic agreement framework that strengthens legal certainty, informed consent, and personal data security. Using a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, this research examines Indonesia’s Health Law, the Personal Data Protection (PDP) Law, the Electronic Information and Transactions (EIT) Law, and sectoral telemedicine regulations, supported by relevant scholarly literature. The findings demonstrate that Indonesia’s telemedicine governance remains constrained by regulatory gaps and normative disharmony, particularly in direct-to-patient services, due to the absence of standardized electronic informed consent (e-consent) procedures, weak digital identity verification, and unclear demarcation of liability between physicians as medical professionals and platforms as electronic system providers. These weaknesses expose patients to heightened risks of malpractice disputes, evidentiary challenges in electronic medical records, and personal data breaches. To address these issues, this study proposes a blockchain-enabled therapeutic agreement model integrated with smart contract mechanisms to ensure immutable consent records, transparent audit trails, enforceable allocation of rights and obligations, and privacy-by-design compliance with the PDP Law. The novelty of this study lies in integrating health law principles with blockchain-based contractual architecture as a concrete regulatory and operational blueprint for patient protection within Indonesia’s digital health ecosystem. This model provides policy implications for establishing standardized digital contract templates, risk-based supervision, and interoperable verification systems to enhance trust, accountability, and equitable access to telemedicine, including in frontier, outermost, and remote (3T) regions.

This study examines the legal certainty afforded to healthcare workers in performing emergency medical procedures in Indonesia and compares it with the legal protection framework implemented in Thailand. The urgency of this research arises from the increasing criminalization and malpractice claims faced by healthcare workers acting in good faith under high-risk and time-sensitive emergency conditions. Using a normative juridical method that incorporates statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches, this study analyzes Law Number 17 of 2023 on Health in conjunction with Thailand’s Emergency Medical Act and the application of the Good Samaritan principle. The findings reveal that although Indonesian law normatively recognizes legal protection for healthcare workers, its implementation remains weak due to the absence of technical guidelines, inconsistent law enforcement practices, and the limited role of professional medical institutions in the early stages of legal proceedings. In contrast, Thailand provides more effective legal certainty through explicit statutory immunity, integrated institutional support, and a restorative legal approach toward emergency medical practice. The novelty of this study lies in its comparative analysis, demonstrating that Thailand’s qualified immunity model may serve as a normative and institutional reference for strengthening legal protection for healthcare workers in Indonesia, particularly in emergency medical contexts. This study contributes to the development of health law by offering policy-oriented recommendations to enhance legal certainty, professional security, and patient safety.

Reus and Mens Rea In Village Fund Corruption Cases Aprilia Khoirun Nisa, Ali Maskur Faculty of Sharia and Law, Walisongo State Islamic University, Semarang, Indonesia apriliakhoirunnisa22@gmail.com Abstract This study examines the judicial application of actus reus and mens rea in village fund corruption cases, with a specific focus on Decision Number 2/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN Smg involving a village head in Blora Regency. The persistence of corruption at the village governance level highlights the need for doctrinal consistency between judicial reasoning and classical principles of criminal liability. Using a normative juridical method with statutory, case, and conceptual approaches, this research analyzes how the court established the outward unlawful conduct (actus reus) through proven abuse of authority, manipulation of village financial administration, and resulting state financial losses, as well as how it inferred the inward culpable intent (mens rea) from deliberate and systematic misuse of public funds. The findings demonstrate that the judge’s reasoning substantially aligns with Moeljatno’s theory, which emphasizes the unity between unlawful acts and moral blameworthiness as the foundation of criminal responsibility. The judgment also reflects formal compliance with Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 2020 on corruption sentencing guidelines, although its emphasis on nominal financial loss raises normative tension with the primacy of moral culpability in classical criminal law. The novelty of this study lies in its integrated doctrinal assessment that simultaneously evaluates actus reus, mens rea, causality, and sentencing considerations, thereby reaffirming the continued relevance of classical criminal law theory in contemporary corruption adjudication involving village funds.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan sistem pemindahan narapidana antarnegara di Jepang dan Belanda untuk mengidentifikasi model hukum yang dapat diadaptasi oleh Indonesia. Latar belakang penelitian ini muncul dari meningkatnya jumlah warga negara asing yang dihukum di Indonesia, serta warga negara Indonesia yang menjalani hukuman di luar negeri. Sementara itu, Indonesia belum memiliki peraturan khusus mengenai pemindahan narapidana antarnegara. Urgensi penelitian ini terletak pada perlunya landasan hukum yang menjamin hak asasi manusia, kepastian hukum, dan efektivitas reintegrasi sosial bagi narapidana. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan komparatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Jepang mengatur pemindahan narapidana berdasarkan Konvensi Dewan Eropa tentang Pemindahan Narapidana (1983) melalui Undang-Undang No. 66 Tahun 2002, yang menekankan persetujuan sukarela, prinsip-prinsip kemanusiaan, dan perlindungan hak asasi manusia. Sementara itu, Belanda menerapkan Wet wederzijdse erkenning en tenuitvoerlegging vrijheidsbenemende en voorwaardelijke sancties (WETS), yang diadopsi dari Keputusan Kerangka Kerja Dewan 2008/909/JHA, yang mencakup sistem pengawasan ketat dan mekanisme sertifikat di antara negara-negara anggota Uni Eropa. Jepang unggul dalam melindungi hak-hak individu, sementara Belanda lebih efisien dalam mengoordinasikan urusan administratif antarnegara. Hasil perbandingan ini memberikan landasan konseptual bagi Indonesia untuk merancang peraturan pemindahan narapidana yang menyeimbangkan prinsip legalitas, kemanusiaan, dan kepastian hukum. Kata Kunci: Hukum; Keadilan; Reintegrasi Sosial; Pemindahan Narapidana; Hak Asasi Manusia