This study aims to analyze the criminal responsibility of perpetrators of corruption who have returned state financial losses. Criminal responsibility in corruption crimes is regulated in Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3 of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption. This study examines a corruption case with defendant Petrus Sabungan Hiras Fredy Aritonang Radjagukguk who was charged with committing a corruption crime with a state loss of Rp5,900,000,000, as decided in Decision Number 49/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN Medan. In this case, the panel of judges at the first instance acquitted the defendant, even though the public prosecutor had filed a cassation appeal which was later rejected through Decision Number 2767 K/Pid.Sus/2022. The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory approach and case studies, which are sourced from primary and secondary legal materials through literature studies. This research is descriptive with qualitative data analysis. The results of the study indicate that the restitution of state financial losses does not eliminate the criminal liability of the perpetrator of corruption, but can only be used as a mitigating factor for the sentence, as stipulated in Article 4 of Law Number 31 of 1999. The court's decision in the a quo case is deemed not to fully reflect the spirit and objectives of eradicating corruption, because the judge's considerations have not optimally assessed the defendant's position, authority, and responsibility in the process of committing the unlawful act.

The determination of suspects is a crucial stage that has an impact on human rights and the legitimacy of law enforcement. This study analyzes the procedure for determining suspects based on evidence, identifies challenges, and formulates solutions at the Medan Timur Police Station. The method used is qualitative empirical law. Primary data were obtained from interviews with experienced investigators, while secondary data were obtained from regulations, court decisions, and relevant literature. Normatively, the mechanism for determining suspects refers to the Criminal Procedure Code, Constitutional Court decisions, and Chief of Police regulations, which require the fulfillment of two pieces of evidence and a case title. However, empirically, three main challenges were identified: the limited technical capacity of investigators in handling technological evidence, inadequate infrastructure, and public and media pressure in high-profile cases. The findings indicate that witness testimony remains dominant, while digital evidence is not yet fully optimized. It is concluded that the case title acts as an internal filter, but does not fully counteract external pressure. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the capacity of investigators, optimize investigation facilities, and increase public legal awareness to ensure the professional, accountable, and fair determination of suspects.

This study aims to analyze the judges' considerations in Supreme Court Decision Number 123 K/Pdt.Sus PHI/2022 regarding termination of employment (PHK) due to efficiency, particularly in the context of worker protection, legal certainty, and the application of labor norms. The study uses a normative juridical method with an approach of analyzing court decisions and legal literature. The results of the analysis show that the judge emphasized that termination of employment due to efficiency is legally valid if the employer can prove the existence of losses or potential losses to the company and has fulfilled the rights of workers, including severance pay, length of service awards, and compensation in accordance with PP 35/2021. The judges' considerations reflect the application of Law 13/2003, PP 35/2021, as well as the principles of worker protection, justice, and legal certainty, although the standard of proof for efficiency remains relatively flexible. This study concludes that the decision provides legal certainty for employers as well as adequate protection for workers, but requires consistent supervision and enforcement to maintain the principle of substantive justice. . While this ruling provides legal certainty for the disputing parties, academically, we need to examine the Ratio Decidendi, or the judge's underlying reasoning. The question is: How does the judge determine the threshold at which a company is deemed "efficient" enough to lay off workers? Without strict criteria, the rationale of efficiency risks becoming a "convenient tool" for companies to unilaterally terminate employment.

Corruption negatively affects the state's economy and undermines the national economy's stability. Law enforcement practices tend to emphasize tangible and measurable state financial losses, while losses to the national economy are often positioned merely as aggravating factors in sentencing. This study aims to examine the reconceptualization of the calculation of national economic losses in corruption cases. The research employs a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The findings indicate that although court decisions have acknowledged the existence of national economic losses, the prevailing legal framework does not clearly regulate the authority or methodology for calculating such losses. This lack of clarity regarding authority and methodology creates normative ambiguity, resulting in legal uncertainty in proving corruption offenses. Therefore, a nationally standardized guideline for calculating national economic losses is necessary to ensure measurability, transparency, and inter-agency collaboration, as well as to guarantee consistency in judicial decisions in order to achieve legal certainty in the proof of corruption offenses.

The influence of interest groups in United States policy-making process is undeniable. This study critically examines that how interest groups shape public policy in the United States and evaluates the democratic risks their influence poses, alongside regulatory and institutional responses designed to mitigate those risks. This research evaluates negative impact of interest groups on US public policy from a critical perspective. The study, based on qualitative and institutional analysis, examines that how the mechanisms of campaign financing, lobbying practices, and Supreme Court decisions have altered relationship between political participation and democratic fairness. This reassessment underscores that managing the interest group influence is not about the exclusion but about calibrating engagement to uphold democratic ideals.The study does not dispute constitutional right to advocate and engage politically; it just asserts that the current system gives an unfair advantage to moneyed interests, eroding public trust and making democracy less responsive. Finally, the article offers a set of specific regulatory r eforms intended to make the US policy-making process more transparent, to curb undue influence, and to create a fairer environment for the interaction between organized interests and the public good than what exists today.

This paper analyses the scope, effect, and limits of Supreme Court of India (SC) judgments in the domain of environmental crimes. Over the last four decades the Court has transformed environmental jurisprudence in India by importing global principles (precautionary principle, polluter-pays, sustainable development) and by developing doctrines such as absolute liability and expanded public interest remedies. Yet when it comes to criminal accountability for environmental harm the picture is mixed: the Court’s judgments have expanded avenues for redress and deterrence but face institutional, statutory, and doctrinal constraints that limit enforcement, criminal prosecution, and effective punishment. This study examines the major Supreme Court decisions, evaluates how they treat criminal liability (for individuals, officials, and corporations), identifies gaps between judicial pronouncements and practical enforcement, surveys recent trends, and suggests legal and policy reforms to strengthen criminal enforcement for environmental offences.

This article analyses the constitutional and procedural implications of the absence of pre-trial authority to review decisions to terminate preliminary inquiries (penghentian penyelidikan) in Indonesia’s criminal justice system. While suspects are afforded robust due process guarantees through pre-trial mechanisms, victims lack a commensurate judicial forum to contest unilateral police decisions to terminate proceedings at the preliminary inquiry stage. This procedural asymmetry engenders a structural lacuna, conceptualised herein as an “injustice gap.” Employing a normative legal research method, the study examines the 1981 Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP 1981), the newly approved 2025 Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP 2025), relevant Constitutional Court decisions, and related judicial practices within the theoretical frameworks of John Rawls’s theory of justice and Lon L. Fuller’s concept of the internal morality of law. The analysis demonstrates that the current asymmetrical distribution of protections between suspects and victims is incompatible with the constitutional principles of equality before the law, legal certainty, and the right to an effective remedy. Accordingly, the article proposes three reform pathways: (1) explicitly regulating the termination of preliminary inquiries as an object of pre-trial review; (2) constitutional reinterpretation by the Constitutional Court; or (3) establishing a Preliminary Examining Judge (Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan, HPP) to reconstruct pre-trial proceedings as an effective remedy for victims.

The evolution of modern civil procedural law demands dispute resolution mechanisms that are responsive, efficient, and substantively just. In this context, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) particularly mediation and arbitration has transformed from a supplementary option into a central instrument within Indonesia’s dispute resolution architecture. This study aims to analyze the development of ADR from the perspective of modern civil procedural law, focusing on the normative status and practical efficiency of mediation and arbitration as pre-litigation mechanisms. The research employs a normative-juridical approach, analyzing primary legal sources (legislation, Supreme Court Regulations [PERMA], court decisions) and secondary sources (scholarly journals, books, policy documents). The findings indicate that mediation has been mandatorily integrated into civil procedure through PERMA No. 1 of 2016, functioning as a court-facilitated pre-litigation stage, while arbitration operates as a consensual out-of-court mechanism under Law No. 30 of 1999. Both mechanisms demonstrate clear efficiency in terms of time (resolution within weeks to months), cost (minimal to predictable), and the ability to preserve parties’ relationships through collaborative processes and procedural confidentiality. Nevertheless, implementation challenges remain, particularly concerning the availability of qualified mediators and public perception of ADR. The study concludes that ADR is no longer a marginal alternative but an integral pillar of modern civil justice, aligning with principles of procedural efficiency and substantive justice.

Background: New court decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union change the paradigm of assessing on-call duty outside the workplace for healthcare workers so that it can be considered working time in certain circumstances despite the current wording of Section 96 of the Labor Code. The transposition of the conclusions of certain court decisions into the Labor Code would significantly contribute to the improvement of the working and wage conditions of healthcare workers. Objectives: The primary goal of the paper is to identify, thoroughly assess, and organize the fundamental theoretical and legal principles behind the judgments rendered by the Court of Justice of the European Union, along with decisions from national courts concerning the concept of working hours, particularly on-call duty. This objective aimed to highlight a potential shift in how working time is evaluated. Methodology: We conducted a search and retrieved national and European court decisions, encompassing 43 judgments from the Court of Justice of the European Union and 22 from national courts. This process involved using the CURIA system, as well as the search systems provided by the Ministry of Justice in both Slovakia and the Czech Republic, including commercial databases housing court decisions and legal rulings (APSI, Judikaty.info) Results: We identified two categories of Court of Justice of the European Union rulings, which were subsequently mirrored in national court decisions. Both sets of decisions examined the evaluation of on-call duty (employee staying outside the workplace), but they diverged in their interpretation of whether it qualified as working time. If an employer mandated that an employee on on-call duty (staying outside the workplace) must be ready to report to work within a specific timeframe (e.g., 20 minutes) if required for work duties, this represents a limitation on the employee’s freedom to manage their leisure time to such an extent that this period could be considered part of the employee’s working hours. Conclusion: Based on recent judicial decisions by the Court of Justice of the European Union, it can be inferred that Section 96 of the Labor Code, which does not categorize on-call duty if an employee stays outside the workplace as working time, contradicts Directive no. 2003/88/EC. Given a comprehensive examination of the case’s circumstances and an evaluation of the impact on the employee’s off-duty rest periods, if the employee is deprived of the autonomy to manage their leisure time at their own discretion due to the employer’s specific instructions during off-site on-call duty, this time period may also qualify as working time.

Constitutional Court Decision Number 169/PUU-XXII/2024 is a new chapter in the struggle for gender mainstreaming in Indonesia through a legal approach. This study aims to analyse the significance of this decision as a progressive legal instrument to promote gender equality in legislative institutions. The research method uses normative juridice research. The findings reveal that this decision reconstructs the MD3 Law with two major breakthroughs: first, it reinforces the phrase ‘prioritising women's representation’ at the leadership level of the Council's Organs as an imperative command; second, it requires the proportional distribution of female members throughout the Council's Organs based on the principles of balance and equity. The implications of this ruling structurally transform the political landscape of parliament by preventing the domestication of women and opening up access to participation in all policy areas.

Aim: Tattoos are regarded as expressions of individual identity and art. Beyond being aesthetic elements, they have become important subjects of examination in legal proceedings, particularly gaining significance in identification processes. Additionally, tattoos warrant sociological investigation due to their broader social implications. Materials and Methods: A total of 145 Court of Cassation decisions containing the term ‘tattoo’ were identified through the Turkish Court of Cassation Decision Search Database. These decisions were thematically analyzed based on the forensic and legal contexts in which tattoos were referenced. Results: In 51.7% of the decisions, tattoos were used as tools of identification, primarily in theft, robbery, and drug-related offenses. However, among these identification-related decisions, only 25.3% included detailed tattoo descriptions. Tattoos were most commonly located on the arm and hand. In 16.6% of the cases, tattoos served as indicators of social interaction, particularly in sexual offense cases involving children. Additionally, 3.4% of the decisions included complaints related to complications following tattoo removal procedures, raising concerns regarding medical and legal oversight. Conclusion: Tattoos serve as important forensic markers in the identification and evaluation of evidence. The findings highlight the need for standardized documentation protocols in judicial processes and for the implementation of stricter oversight in tattoo removal practices to ensure legal consistency and protect individual rights.

Abortion volume in western Pennsylvania before and after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Customary land rights encompass two elements. The first element is a civil law element, namely as the joint ownership right of the members of the relevant customary law community over the customary land, which is believed to have originated from the legacy of their ancestors and is a gift from a supernatural power, as the main support for the life and livelihood and the environment of all members of the customary law community. The second element is a public law element, namely as the authority to manage and regulate the allocation, use, and control of customary land, both in internal relations with its own citizens and externally with non-citizens or "outsiders". In customary law communities, land has an important meaning, because by its nature land is the only asset that, even if it experiences any circumstances whatsoever, remains constant in its state, and sometimes even becomes more advantageous. This issue has become a recurring problem encountered in the field regarding land use. Data from the National Land Agency of Kutai Barat Regency shows that no customary land has been registered with the BPN. However, judging from the locations in Kutai Barat, areas that are productive areas that are often controlled by companies are not customary land. Based on the background described above, the problem identification is what are the issues faced in the Status and Territory of Customary Land in Kutai Barat Regency. The normative juridical method is carried out through a literature study that examines secondary data in the form of legislation, court decisions, agreements, contracts, or other legal documents, as well as research results, assessment results, and other references. The normative juridical method is research that begins with normative research or a study of legislation (normative). According to the data held by the BPN of Kutai Barat Regency, no customary land has been registered with the BPN. However, based on observations and monitoring carried out by the National Land Agency (BPN), the land that is currently considered customary land is located in West Kutai, which is a non-productive forest area. Based on the explanation from the BPN, a monitoring mechanism can be implemented to ensure that customary land is truly customary land. This mechanism is based on the provisions of the Minister of Agrarian Regulation Number 10 of 2016.

This legal writing discusses the resolution of disputes between PT. Lekom Maras Pangabuan Against the Indonesian National Arbitration Agency and PT. Pertamina Based on Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. In writing this law, it uses a type of normative legal research, with a statutory approach and a case approach. The legal materials used are primary legal materials, namely Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Results of this research. Unlawful Acts committed by PT Pertamina EP as the Defendant after being analyzed through Supreme Court decision No. 681 K/PDT/2014 is not proven and if we look at Law Number 30 of 1999, the action of the South Jakarta District Court in overriding the arbitration clause cannot be justified, because clearly in the Arbitration Law in Article 3 it states "if the parties have bound by an arbitration agreement, the District Court has no authority to adjudicate." Then, if you look at Law Number 30 of 1999, the case that occurred between the two parties is a dispute that falls within the authority of arbitration, namely in the trade sector, the parties also agreed to resolve the dispute through arbitration before the dispute occurred. Because since the parties entered into an arbitration agreement, the parties are absolutely bound

This study analyzes the framing of news regarding former corruption convicts as legislative candidates in the 2024 General Election on CNN Indonesia. The Supreme Court decision that allows former corruption convicts to run for legislative office has sparked controversy related to election integrity and moral standards of political leadership. This research aims to identify how CNN Indonesia constructs this issue through news framing using Robert N. Entman's model which consists of four elements: define problems, diagnose causes, make moral judgments, and suggest remedies. The research employs a qualitative descriptive method with a constructivist paradigm, analyzing three news articles published on August 22, 2022, through documentation techniques and systematic text coding. The findings reveal that CNN Indonesia consistently frames the Supreme Court's decision as a threat to democratic integrity by defining the issue as a moral problem and election quality risk, attributing the cause of controversy to the Supreme Court through regulatory contradictions, applying dominant negative moral evaluations considering the ineligibility of former corruption convicts without exploring alternative perspectives, and implicitly recommending solutions through regulatory reform and strengthening public selectivity. The framing pattern reflects CNN Indonesia's ideological position that prioritizes election integrity and leadership moral standards, positioning the media as a moral agent reinforcing anti-corruption norms in public discourse. This study contributes to understanding how Indonesian mass media construct political discourse about integrity and eligibility of public leader candidates in the context of electoral democracy still facing systemic corruption challenges.

In national land law, there is the right of state control over land and rights that can be owned individually. In accordance with the provisions of Article 28H paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution, it states that "Everyone has the right to have private property rights and such property rights may not be taken over arbitrarily by anyone." However, in the provisions of Article 33 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, it states that land is controlled by the state and is intended for the greatest prosperity of the people. From this provision, there is a crossroads as to when land rights can become private property of individuals and land that can be owned by the state to realize the welfare of the people by revoking land rights for the public interest. The method used in this research is the normative legal research method or doctrinal legal research, namely legal research that positions law as a system of normative structures. The normative system in question is regarding the principles, norms, rules of statutory regulations, court decisions, agreements and doctrines (teachings). This research was conducted using a conceptual approach and a statutory approach by examining all interrelated laws and regulations as well as legal principles and doctrines or views from legal experts. The implementation of Agrarian Reform can be realized optimally if there is political will from the government, support from legislative institutions, separation of interests between officials and business people, support from law enforcement officers, community involvement, availability of needed materials, and optimal preparation related to the implementation of agrarian reform.

Disputes over foundation governance in Indonesia are frequently resolved through formal administrative approaches, often overlooking the substantive legitimacy of founders and internal procedures. This study analyzes judicial reasoning in Court Decision No. 6/Pdt.G/2025/PN Agm, specifically regarding the validity of management and its alignment with the principle of legality. Utilizing normative legal methods, including statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, this research examines court decisions, legislation, and academic literature. The findings suggest that the court prioritizes administrative aspects over statutory requirements, including founders' meetings and articles of association. This leads to non-normative reasoning, including the pragmatic assumption that "whoever produces the document first prevails." Additionally, the absence of notary involvement in examining amended deeds resulted in formal defects, as notarial deeds cannot be legally assessed without the presence of the drafter. The study concludes that foundation dispute resolution must strike a balance between formal and substantive legality, while ensuring a comprehensive examination of notarial deeds. This research contributes to the discourse by highlighting the need for harmonized judicial practice and evaluating the procedural role of notaries in cases involving dual governance.

This article is devoted to a comprehensive study of the legal mechanism for determining a child's nationality in light of constitutional guarantees and international human rights standards. The purpose of the study is to identify problems and systemic contradictions between the current norms of the national legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the international obligations of the state in the area of ensuring the child's right to ethnic self-identification. The analysis is based on the provisions of the Constitution, regulatory decisions of the Constitutional Court, the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On Marriage (Matrimony) and Family», and international treaties ratified by the Republic of Kazakhstan. To ensure completeness and objectivity, the experience of the CIS countries and non-CIS countries was analysed, in particular, the legal consolidation of national identity in Israel and Bosnia and Herzegovina - countries in which constitutions formalize the special status of «titular» nations. The experience of Canada and Belgium was considered, whose legislative practice allows us to assess the risks of applying a similar model in multinational states, including Kazakhstan. The study found that the automatic determination of nationality based on the origin of parents creates the preconditions for discrimination, especially in relation to orphans and stateless persons, and substantiated that the existing regulatory model requires revision in order to ensure the voluntary nature of ethnic self-identification and prevent confusion between the concepts of nationality and citizenship. The study is based on a combination of general scientific and specialized methods: deduction, historical, comparative legal, and systemic analysis, case studies, and a doctrinal approach. The empirical basis was formed by the normative legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan, international legal documents (including the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness), as well as decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and materials of law enforcement practice of the CIS states. The results of the study can be used for further reform of family and marriage legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The results of the conducted research may be useful for the scientific community, legislative bodies, and human rights organizations.

This study analyzes the implementation of child maintenance rights fulfillment after divorce based on the Decision of the Religious Court of Surabaya Number 4971/Pdt.G/2024/PA.Sby. The research employs an empirical legal method with a qualitative approach through interviews with the involved parties. The results indicate that despite the court decision having permanent legal force, its implementation has not fully complied with the verdict, where the father only pays partial child support. These findings confirm systemic weaknesses due to the court's passive authority and the absence of a post-ruling monitoring mechanism. Grounded in John Rawls' social justice theory, this study recommends active state intervention through compulsory technical regulations to ensure certainty in fulfilling child maintenance rights, regardless of the parents' employment status. The research highlights the urgency of proactive legal protection for children as the most vulnerable party in divorce cases.

This study examines As'adiyah Sengkang Islamic University (UNISAD) students' understanding of juvenile criminal decisions in legal education. The Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law (UU SPPA No. 11 of 2012) requires child protection principles like diversion and restorative justice, but students at the Faculty of Sharia and Islamic Law (FSHI) UNISAD may not understand them when analyzing court decisions. This study examines how students internalize the child protection paradigm and how the Islamic legal education curriculum shapes their views on juvenile criminalization. The method is empirical legal study utilizing quantitative and qualitative methods. Primary data was collected from FSHI students who took juvenile criminal law courses using standardized questionnaires and in-depth interviews. Patterns and comprehension were found using descriptive data analysis. The results indicate that kids comprehend diversion theoretically. When presented with real-life decision cases, their understanding tends to revert to a retributive approach (conventional punishment), indicating that campus legal education has not fully transformed their thinking paradigm to a comprehensive child protection perspective. This project provides data-driven feedback for the FSHI UNISAD to improve juvenile criminal justice teaching techniques and curriculum. To make legal education more relevant, graduates should know sharia theory and positive law and be sensitive and competent to monitor restorative justice methods in juvenile criminal justice.