Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal POLICY, LAW, NOTARY AND REGULATORY ISSUES (POLRI)
Anastasia Rentama Sijabat
Faculty of Law, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Normative Anomaly in Governmental Authority: A Doctrinal Analysis of Forest Area Enforcement in Indonesia Anastasia Rentama Sijabat; Anna Erliyana
POLICY, LAW, NOTARY AND REGULATORY ISSUES Vol. 5 No. 2 (2026): APRIL
Publisher : Transpublika Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55047/polri.v5i2.2252

Abstract

Indonesia’s Job Creation Law (Law No. 6 of 2023) introduced a widespread legislative practice of designating the generic term “Central Government” as the legal subject for delegated authority in sectoral statutes. This practice generates substantive ambiguity in identifying the specific officeholder (ambtsdrager) responsible for administrative action, thereby undermining administrative accountability across regulatory sectors. This study examines how this authority anomaly persists in non-labor regulatory contexts, taking Presidential Regulation No. 5 of 2025 on Forest Area Enforcement as the principal case study. Using a normative-doctrinal methodology with statutory, conceptual, and case-based approaches, this research assesses the legal validity of the Forest Area Enforcement Task Force through the attribution-delegation-mandate doctrine, Kelsen’s hierarchy of norms, and administrative legal protection principles. The analysis reveals three critical problems: the absence of a clear statutory basis for the Task Force’s authority; substantive inconsistency with Government Regulation No. 24 of 2021 as the sectoral implementing regulation; and structural misalignment with constitutional court jurisprudence on authority specificity. The study proposes a three-layered normative reconstruction encompassing judicial review, legislative revision, and executive reorganization of the implementing structure. These findings contribute to Indonesian administrative law reform discourse and demonstrate that institutional clarity in governmental authority structures is a necessary precondition for preserving the rule of law.
Reconstructing State Economic Loss Calculation in Corporate Corruption Adjudication Anastasia Rentama Sijabat
POLICY, LAW, NOTARY AND REGULATORY ISSUES Vol. 5 No. 3 (2026): JULY
Publisher : Transpublika Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55047/polri.v5i3.2262

Abstract

Indonesian anti-corruption adjudication continues to grapple with inconsistent quantification of state financial loss in corporate corruption cases. This study examined two recent cassation rulings of the Indonesian Supreme Court involving the palm oil industry and analyzed them against two 2026 rulings of the Constitutional Court that reaffirmed the exclusive declaring authority of the Supreme Audit Agency and entrenched the actual loss principle. Using a normative juridical design, the analysis combined statute, case, and conceptual approaches, complemented by comparative insights from the French Sapin II framework and the Spanish recovery model. The evidence indicated a methodological disorientation, namely that the same court relied on a proceeds-oriented calculus in one ruling and a loss-oriented calculus in another, even though the underlying fact patterns were materially comparable. This oscillation has eroded legal certainty and weakened the deterrent function of corporate criminal liability. To address this and to harmonize practice with the new constitutional jurisprudence, the discussion proposed an Integrated Economic and Ecological Audit Standard, configured as a three-layer architecture in which the Supreme Audit Agency declares, supporting institutions supply technical valuations, and the trial court independently validates. Five components, comprising unlawful gain, direct fiscal loss, ecological recovery cost, downstream economic loss, and social cost, are reframed as quantifiable financial figures within the broader umbrella of state economic loss. The findings suggested that consistent adoption of this architecture could systematize judicial reasoning, improve recovery rates, and tighten corporate accountability, offering practitioners and lawmakers a coherent doctrinal template.
Co-Authors Anna Erliyana