This study aims 1) to determine the function of academic papers in the formation of Legislation; 2) to analyze and criticize the urgency of drafting academic texts in the formation of Regional Regulations. This type of research is normative juridical research with three approaches, namely the statutory approach, the conceptual approach and the historical approach. The results showed that the Law on the Establishment of Legislation does not clearly and in detail the regulation and function of academic papers. Even though the preparation of an academic text is an obligation in submitting a Draft Regional Regulation as mandated by Article 43 paragraph (3) of the Law on the Formation of Laws and Regulations, which confirms that the Draft Law originating from the DPR, President or DPD must be accompanied by an academic text and accompanied by an explanation or description and / or academic paper. Preparation of academic texts in the formation of Regional Regulations is expected to improve the quality of Regional Regulations. For all parties, both formers of Regional Regulations, academics, and practitioners in compiling academic papers, it is hoped that they can pay attention to and meet the material and formal requirements in order to produce quality academic papers. At the level of implementation, there are still academic texts that have not met the formal and material requirements, among others, due to the preparation of academic papers after the Draft Regional Regulation has been drafted, inadequate time for preparing academic papers, improper use of budgets, the composition of the compilation team inadequate, as well as less supportive facilities and infrastructure. With regard to this urgency, the preparation of an academic text is mandatory in the preparation of Regional Regulations including the Draft Regional Budget Regional Regulations. The legal consequence is that if you do not prepare an academic paper in advance for the Regional Regulation, it will be null and void.

This study aims to analyze the position of statutory regulations as the main limiting framework for administrative discretion in Indonesian administrative law, particularly after the enactment of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation. The main issue examined is the normative shift caused by the removal of the requirement that discretion must not contradict statutory regulations, which potentially weakens legal certainty and judicial control. This research uses a normative juridical method with a regulatory and conceptualization approach, and is supported by the theory of discretionary justice, balance of legal objectives, and good governance. The findings indicate that the elimination of formal legality requirements transforms discretion from a legally constrained authority into a broader administrative freedom, increasing the risk of abuse of power and weakening the objective standards of judicial review in administrative courts. The study concludes that such a shift undermines the core principles of the rule of law and necessitates constitutional review to restore legal certainty, accountability, and effective judicial oversight.

Land acquisition for public purposes constitutes a critical instrument supporting Indonesia's national development, yet persistent inconsistencies in compensation determination undermine property rights protection and social justice objectives. This normative legal research examines the regulatory framework governing compensation and analyzes implementation gaps through detailed case study of Surabaya District Court Decision Number 1090/Pdt.G/2023/PN Sby. Employing statutory, conceptual, and analytical approaches, the study investigates how Law Number 2 of 2012 and Presidential Regulation Number 19 of 2021 translate into practice. Findings reveal that implementation suffers from formalistic interpretation prioritizing administrative documentation over substantive rights recognition. Four interconnected factors drive compensation inconsistencies: divergent legal interpretation in determining eligible recipients, inadequate transparency in appraisal procedures, structural misalignment between formal requirements and informal land transaction realities, and insufficient oversight coupled with limited public legal awareness. These deficiencies generate horizontal conflicts between registered owners and actual possessors, vertical tensions between communities and government authorities, development project delays, and perpetuation of displacement-induced poverty. Analysis demonstrates compensation disputes arise not solely from valuation disagreements but from fundamental questions regarding legitimate stakeholder identification and meaningful participation in deliberation processes. The study concludes that effective reform requires legislative clarification of ambiguous provisions, institutional capacity development for implementing authorities, transformation of deliberation mechanisms into genuine participatory forums, establishment of independent oversight bodies, and acceleration of systematic land registration programs to prevent future tenure conflicts.

Purpose: This study examines passenger expectations for security measures at future vertiports supporting electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft. No formal passenger-level security requirements yet exist for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) systems, making empirical understanding of passenger expectations essential for commercial deployment.Design/methodology/approach: A cross-sectional survey of 1,247 U.S. adults was conducted in 2024 using an online instrument. Analyses included nonparametric tests, Principal Coordinates Analysis (PCoA), and hierarchical clustering to identify latent attitudinal dimensions and passenger security personas.Findings: Results indicate strong support for efficient, technology-enhanced screening, with no significant differences across gender, travel frequency, or residential location. Familiarity with UAM technology was the only factor significantly associated with higher security importance ratings (H(2) = 10.48, p = .005). PCoA identified two core dimensions: physical security concerns and privacy/surveillance concerns. Hierarchical clustering revealed five passenger personas: Traditional Security Advocates (28%), Tech-Savvy Travelers (23%), Privacy-Conscious Passengers (6%), Balanced Approach Passengers (10%), and Security Skeptics (34%).Research limitations/implications: The cross-sectional methodology captures stated preferences rather than observed behavior. The online sample may overrepresent digitally literate individuals. Future research should employ longitudinal designs and field evaluations in operational vertiports.Practical implications: Vertiport operators should implement hybrid security models accommodating diverse preferences rather than uniform approaches. Opt-in biometric pathways, transparent data-handling practices, and choice-based screening may optimize acceptance. Public education about automated screening technologies may increase comfort among skeptical passengers.Originality/value: This is the first U.S.-based empirical assessment of passenger expectations regarding vertiport security. The dual-dimensional attitudinal structure and five security personas provide evidence-based considerations for vertiport planners, operators, and regulatory agencies developing passenger screening protocols for emerging UAM systems.

Artificial Intelligence is increasingly embedded in national security, defense, and critical infrastructure systems, yet the security of these systems remains insufficiently addressed in traditional cybersecurity education. National initiatives led by the National Security Agency and the National Science Foundation have identified the Security of Artificial Intelligence (SecureAI) as a distinct educational priority supported by formal knowledge units and program validation requirements. Concurrently, workforce data and federal reporting reveal persistent shortages of qualified cybersecurity professionals, particularly in defense and government sectors. This paper presents Illinois Institute of Technology as a case study in the design of a SecureAI applied concentration aligned with NSA-style knowledge units and Center of Academic Excellence principles. The paper demonstrates how a four-course SecureAI program, anchored by a shared undergraduate and graduate cybersecurity foundation, addresses emerging AI security risks while strengthening the national cybersecurity workforce pipeline.

ABSTRACT This paper examines a tension between three plausible claims: that violations of formal coherence requirements are paradigmatically irrational; that formal incoherence is best modeled as belief fragmentation; and that fragmentation need not be irrational. I argue that the first claim must be weakened. Some formally incoherent collections of belief are not irrational, because they are not appropriately subject to rational evaluation. Drawing on a Scanlonian notion of judgment‐sensitivity, I propose that only incoherence that is remediable through reasoning constitutes irrationality. This view explains why fragmentation in domains such as perception and motor control is epistemically suboptimal without being irrational, while preserving a role for coherence norms in cases where coordination across fragments is possible.

Abstract This paper examines the transformation of Craver’s (2009) mutual manipulability (MM) account into the matched interlevel experiments (MIE) framework (Craver et al., 2021) and argues that it amounts to a theoretical reduction of mechanistic constitutive relations to causal mediation. While the MIE account successfully resolves the incoherence challenge that plagued MM, it does so by eliminating the distinctive theoretical content that constitutive categories were supposed to provide. The processual reframing that enables this solution replaces hierarchical part-whole relationships with temporal causal sequences, changing what mechanistic explanations are understood to accomplish. Drawing on paradigmatic action potential experiments, I demonstrate that practices satisfying MIE’s formal requirements consistently establish causal mediation relationships without requiring constitutive interpretation. I address several theoretical defenses of constitutive categories—including interpretive objections about two types of constitution, arguments for distinctive explanatory value, and appeals to mechanistic levels—showing that none can rescue constitutive distinctiveness once constitution is explicitly identified with causal betweenness. Rather than undermining mechanistic approaches, this analysis suggests that their explanatory power derives from methodological sophistication in investigating complex, multi-scale causal structures rather than from categorically distinct constitutive relationships.

Informal Digital Learning of English (IDLE) provides extensive authentic input; however, its casual digital register often diverges from the formal sociopragmatic requirements of vocational contexts. This study investigates the impact of such informal exposure on Willingness to Communicate (WTC) among 229 vocational school students. To address self-report bias, the data were collected using a situated measurement protocol through a validated 15-item questionnaire that measured Receptive IDLE (consuming content), Productive IDLE (creating content), and WTC, following industry-specific simulations that anchored WTC in a professional rather than social context. Descriptive analysis revealed a "scrolling" phenomenon: students were highly engaged in receptive activities like watching TikTok/Instagram Reels (M = 3.08), but showed low engagement in productive activities such as online chatting (M = 2.31). Pearson correlation analysis indicated a statistically significant but weak positive correlation between Receptive IDLE and WTC (r = 0.260, p < 0.01) and a negligible correlation between Productive IDLE and WTC (r = 0.139, p < 0.05). Rather than dismissing these weak correlations as negligible, this study interprets them as empirical evidence of a pragmatic dissonance, that is, a critical gap in which informal digital pragmatic linguistic gains fail to transfer into professional sociopragmatic competence. The findings suggest that while 'scrolling' and 'posting' increase familiarity, they do not inherently build professional confidence. Therefore, it is suggested that educators bridge this dissonance through a mixed or combined pedagogical approach that integrates explicit register awareness with task-based vocational simulations to transform informal digital input into professionally competent output.

This study analyzes the social barriers preventing artisans in Girilayu Batik Village, Central Java, from securing Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection for traditional batik knowledge. Using a qualitative approach with purposive sampling and in-depth interviews with seven key informants conducted between June and August 2024, the study identifies three main constraints: the absence of a collective artisan identity required for legal classification and representation, the incompatibility of oral knowledge transmission with formal IPR requirements, and the lack of unified institutional structures for registration. Drawing on Bourdieu’s framework, the findings show that fragmented habitus and weak social capital hinder the transformation of embodied cultural capital into institutionalized legal protection. The study demonstrates structural incompatibilities between existing IPR laws and traditional knowledge systems and underscores the need for sui generis legislation that accommodates collective ownership, oral transmission, and cultural significance.

Large-scale oil palm plantation development has transformed Sumatra into a strategic economic region while intensifying environmental degradation and recurrent flooding associated with forest conversion. These conditions raise legal questions regarding the substantive compliance of plantation licensing policies with environmental law principles and the scope of state responsibility for ecological disasters. This study examines whether oil palm plantation licensing in Sumatra substantially complies with environmental law and whether recurrent floods justify classification as a national disaster with implications for state responsibility. Using a normative legal research method, this study applies statutory, conceptual, and case-based approaches grounded in constitutional, environmental, forestry, plantation, and disaster management laws. The findings show that although plantation licensing policies largely comply with formal administrative requirements, the government fails to satisfy substantive environmental law principles, including the precautionary principle, prevention, sustainable development, and the polluter-pays principle. Licenses authorising forest conversion have contributed to structural environmental degradation and increased flood risks. Under the prevailing fault-based legal framework, state liability for flood disasters resulting from licensing policies remains limited, despite identifiable causal links between administrative decisions and environmental harm. This condition warrants a shift toward a more substantive interpretation of state responsibility to ensure accountability for environmental disasters across Sumatra.

The recent technological development and the prevalent use of generative AI applications have rendered commitments to research ethics and integrity more challenging. This study investigates Moroccan doctoral students’ accounts of decision-making in English-language academic writing and publishing, alongside the institutional and relational conditions associated with those decisions. This study may be salient for higher education contexts in which formal ethics procedures and AI-related guidance remain uneven, in light of publication pressures and uncertain standards. Data were generated through semi-structured interviews with twelve doctoral candidates from multiple disciplines at two public Moroccan universities, and were subsequently analyzed thematically. The analysis yielded three interconnected themes: (1) institutional ethics infrastructure and its practical accessibility, (2) supervisory mentorship as a source of direction and accountability, and (3) peer-based norms shaping AI use in academic writing and expectations regarding disclosure. The findings suggest that unclear procedures and uneven supervision are associated with the growth of informal peer practices, heightened strain, and variable alignment with formal requirements. The article proposes a multi-level framework which links institutional environment, workgroup climate, and issue-specific evaluations of AI use to reported ethical practices. It also points to the value of structured ethics education, supervisor development initiatives, and clear guidance on AI transparency in academic work.

This research utilizes a normative juridical approach oriented towards regulation and conceptual analysis, focusing on comparing legal norms before and after the amendment. The findings indicate that the Cyberbullying experienced by Arya Mohan substantially fulfills the elements of a criminal offense as regulated in Article 27 paragraph (3) of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (2008-2016) and Article 27A of Law Number 1 of 2024 concerning the Second Amendment to the ITE Law. These articles specifically criminalize defamation and insult through electronic platforms, with criminal penalties. The context explains that the changes through Law Number 1 of 2024 affirm this case as an absolute complaint offense, meaning legal proceedings only commence upon an official report from the victim or their proxy. The case involving Arya Mohan shows that the absence of a victim's report and the loss of most evidence due to deletion actions resulted in unfulfilled formal requirements and insufficient evidence, leading to the discontinuation of legal proceedings despite all substantive elements being met, such as intent and dissemination of insults. The legal implications of these findings show that successful law enforcement regarding Cyberbullying heavily depends on victim reports and the availability of valid electronic evidence, such as screenshots or server logs. Indonesia's legal framework has provided a robust normative basis for addressing Cyberbullying, but implementation remains dependent on complaint mechanisms and criminal procedural testing. To address this, reforms such as strengthening evidence preservation protocols by platform providers and public education on victims' rights are needed to enhance law enforcement in the digital era.

Reconsidering ethics in social and tourism research is an urgent task today, considering practices that, despite claiming to be participatory, continue to reproduce epistemic hierarchies and extractive relationships of knowledge. Through a critical and hermeneutic literature review of twenty-nine sources (2004–2023), this study highlights the necessity of incorporating ethics as a transversal axis in all research processes, especially in studies conducted with rural communities, indigenous peoples, and women, whose knowledge is often marginalized or instrumentalized. The analysis identifies three converging dimensions: epistemic-deontological ethics, focused on scientific and social responsibility; contextual bioethics, which adapts universal principles to the realities of different contexts; and relational-reflexive ethics, which promotes a dialogical logic between the researcher and the researched. The findings demonstrate that only a situated and co-produced ethics can ensure the legitimacy of knowledge, dignify local voices, and adapt methodologies to cultural contexts. This work invites the incorporation of ethics not as a formal requirement, but as a living practice that connects science, territory, and cognitive justice.

The institution of private prosecution, maintaining its historical continuity since the reforms of 1864, occupies a special place in the Russian criminal justice system and embod a balance between private and public principles. However, recently this institution has been facing a systemic crisis, caused by contradictions between its declared dispositive nature and the actual dominance of public law regulatory means. Excessive procedural formalization, procedural inequality of the parties, limited opportunities for genuine reconciliation, and organizational problems associated with the overload of justices of the peace undermine the very essence of private prosecution as a mechanism for accessible and effective justice. Purpose: To analyze the crisis in private prosecution criminal proceedings and to develop scientifically sound proposals for its improvement. Methods: the historical method is used to retrospectively analyze the genesis of the institute in question and to identify its initial essence; the comparative legal method is used to compare the theoretical model of private prosecution and established judicial practice; the logical legal method and the formal dogmatic analysis are used to study the current criminal procedural norms and to identify contradictions and gaps in them; the systemic analysis makes it possible to consider private prosecution as an element of the entire criminal justice system and to reveal the relationship between procedural and organizational problems. Results: The study identifies a number of critical procedural problems in the private prosecution system. The formalization of the procedure for initiating private prosecution cases, requiring the victim to draft a semblance of an indictment, results in the majority of applications being returned by justices of the peace due to non-compliance with formal requirements, thereby discrediting the idea of accessible justice. The institute of reconciliation, historically the core of private prosecution, has undergone significant changes: limiting the possibility of reconciliation to the moment the court retires to chambers deprives parties of flexibility, and most reconciliations are formal, being conditioned either by the court’s desire to optimize its workload or by the victim’s realization of the impossibility of proving the charge. Organizational problems are particularly acute in the context of excessive workload for justices of the peace, making it impossible to provide a quality review of cases that relies on an individual approach to the parties. This turns legal proceedings into a mere production line, where the focus shifts from resolving disputes to the perfunctory issuance of decisions.

Administrative appeals as an administrative effort by State Civil Apparatus (ASN) employees who are dissatisfied with the decision to dismiss employees are questioned as to their usefulness in providing legal protection to civil apparatus. This study aims to reveal the construction of an administrative appeal format for the decision to dismiss or terminate the employment of State Civil Apparatus employees that provides more legal protection for ASN employees. Administrative appeals are not merely additional formal requirements before a dispute is examined by a state administrative court but it is truly substantive in its testing and its decision is fully respected. This study is a normative-empirical study that begins with a normative analysis of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials based on a conceptual approach and statutory regulations. Then, It uses a sociological approach to obtain primary data through observation and data collection from informants. The desired result is to provide a prescription for the ideal formulation of legal protection for ASN employees through administrative appeals. The results of the study indicate that in order for administrative appeals to truly provide protection for ASN employees from arbitrary actions by officials, several improvements are needed, namely increasing the composition of BPASN members, examining disputes from a material perspective rather than just a formal examination, clarifying the procedural rules so that ASN employees feel transparent about the resolution and ensuring that administrative decision is complied with and implemented.

Purpose: Shared decision-making (SDM) is a core element of patient-centered care; however, traditional approaches to informed consent and physicians’ duty to explain have often remained procedural and predominantly physician-driven. This review aims to examine how SDM substantively strengthens the physician’s duty to explain and how it may contribute to reducing medical litigation risk while simultaneously improving patient–physician relationships.Current concepts: SDM is a collaborative process in which patients and physicians jointly consider available treatment options, relevant medical evidence, and patients’ individual values and preferences. Evidence from systematic reviews indicates that SDM improves patients’ knowledge, promotes more realistic expectations, reduces decisional conflict, and enhances satisfaction and trust. From a legal perspective, inadequate communication and information asymmetry constitute major contributors to medical disputes. By emphasizing meaningful dialogue, documenting deliberative processes, and incorporating patient decision aids, SDM reframes informed consent from a largely formal requirement into an interactive process that supports patients’ substantive understanding and autonomous decision-making.Discussion and conclusion: Although direct evidence demonstrating that SDM reduces medical errors remains limited, existing findings suggest that SDM may mitigate structural causes of medical disputes by addressing communication failures and unmet patient expectations. By reinforcing the physician’s duty to explain in a substantive and patient-centered manner and by fostering a trust-based therapeutic alliance, SDM has the potential to reduce medical litigation risk. Integrating SDM into routine clinical practice through education, institutional support, and supportive legal frameworks may represent an emerging standard for fulfilling physicians’ duty to explain and for promoting sustainable patient–physician relationships.

Abstract Lately, a new set of expectations is being formed for academics by various stakeholders, that is, to generate “impact” on practice, in addition to their main roles of conducting research, making academic contributions, and teaching. We challenge the legitimacy of this expectation. Further, we argue that there should be major differences between primary and secondary impact. The impact of new academic knowledge on practice tends to be indirect, and sometimes it takes a long time to materialize, and indeed the impact of most management research cannot be precisely attributed to the work of a single person or team. Furthermore, the new direction and expectation of governments and funding bodies regarding impact on practice might work against some of the basic principles of academia, not least academic freedom itself as a cornerstone of the profession. Arising from this, we call for a reconsideration of the formal requirements of further responsibility and pressure on academics. In making this call, we do not argue against engagement, involvement, and collaboration with industry, or knowledge implementation for organizations, but offer a view on what may be an appropriate expectation set from academe.

Bankruptcy law is fundamentally designed as an ultimum remedium due to its severe legal and economic consequences for debtors, creditors, and broader market stability. However, Indonesian bankruptcy law continues to rely on minimal formal requirements, which may facilitate the misuse of bankruptcy petitions against solvent debtors. This article examines how the principle of ultimum remedium and proportionality has been operationalized in judicial practice through Indonesian Supreme Court Decision No. 1714 K/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2022. Using a normative legal approach combined with jurisprudential analysis, this study evaluates the Court’s reasoning in limiting bankruptcy despite the formal statutory requirements being satisfied. The analysis is complemented by a comparative perspective with involuntary bankruptcy regimes in the United States and the rehabilitative-oriented insolvency framework in Singapore. The findings demonstrate a judicial shift from formalistic application toward substantive justice, emphasizing economic impact, proportionality, and the availability of non-bankruptcy alternatives. This development signifies an emerging judicial constraint on bankruptcy as a last resort and provides a normative foundation for future reform of Indonesian bankruptcy law.

This study aims to analyze the position and validity of convening an extraordinary General Meeting of Shareholders (EGMS) by parties who have not yet obtained legal legitimacy as lawful shareholders, with a case study of Decision Cahaya Mulia Persada Nusa Limited Liability Company. The reseacrh examines the legal status of the EGMS organizers and the legal implications of the resolutions adopted without legitimate share ownership. This study applies a normative juridical method using statutory, dotrinal, and case approaches. Data were obtained through library research and analyzed descriptively and qualitatively to interpret the legal norms contained in the company law. The findings indicate that the EGMS held by parties without legitimate shareolder status violates the principle og legality and may lead to the nullification of its resolution. The unclear legal status of the organizers results in legak uncertainty and may harm both the company and other legitimate shareholders. Fulfilling formal and material requirements in the conduct of shareholders mettings, particulary regarding the legitimacy of shareholders as legal subjects, is a crucial element in ensuring legal protection and corporate admiistrative order. This study emphasizes the importance of strengthening normative provisions and verification mechanisms in the implementation of EGMS to ensure legal certainty and the application of good corporate governance principles.

This study examines the legal protection afforded to good-faith housing buyers when objects of a Binding Sale and Purchase Agreement (PPJB) are included in a developer's bankruptcy estate, focusing on Supreme Court Decision No. 24 K/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2025. The research employs a normative juridical method, using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches to analyze bankruptcy law, consumer protection norms, PPJB regulations, and judicial reasoning. The study finds that although the PPJB in the case was privately executed and did not comply with the formal requirements of Ministerial Regulation ATR/BPN No. 16 of 2021, the Supreme Court affirmed that buyers who had fully paid and taken possession before bankruptcy qualify as good-faith third parties entitled to protection. The Court emphasized the asset separation principle, holding that only assets legally owned by the debtor at the time of bankruptcy may form part of the bankruptcy estate, thereby limiting the universality principle and prioritizing substantive justice. By annulling the curator’s action, the decision strengthens consumer protection in developer bankruptcy cases. This study concludes that buyers require both preventive and repressive legal protection, and that PPJBs should be executed as authentic deeds with a power of sale clause to prevent future disputes.