Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

A Comparison of Sanctions for Non-Compliance with the Disclosure of Origin Requirement in Patent Law and Its Relevance to Shari'ah Principles Efridani Lubis; Sukamto Kusnadi; Winahyu Erwiningsih; Noor Nadher Zghair
Nusantara: Journal of Law Studies Vol. 5 No. 2 (2026): Nusantara: Journal of Law Studies
Publisher : PT. Islamic Research Publiser

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.66325/nusantaralaw.v5i2.357

Abstract

This article analyses how India, Brazil, Switzerland, and Indonesia design sanctions for non-compliance with origin disclosure obligations under patent law and examines their implications for fairness, administrative feasibility, and benefit-sharing. It employs a normative-doctrinal legal approach using comparative analysis based on five indicators: legal basis, relationship with access and benefit-sharing regimes, types of sanctions, institutional design, and implications for patent validity. The findings show that differences among these countries lie not primarily in the existence of disclosure obligations, but in sanction design and its normative function: safeguarding patent validity, ensuring biodiversity compliance, or promoting administrative transparency. India represents a stringent patent-enforcement model; Brazil demonstrates an integrated biodiversity-compliance model; Switzerland emphasises administrative transparency; while Indonesia remains largely declarative, without a fully operational enforcement framework. From a Shari'ah perspective, these variations reflect different applications of justice ('adl), proportionality (al-tanāsub), and the appropriateness of sanctions to the offence (al-jazā' min jins al-'amal). Disclosure obligations embody the principles of honesty (ṣidq) and trustworthiness (amānah), while effective sanctions help prevent the illegitimate exploitation of genetic resources and traditional knowledge (ghasb) and promote the public interest (maṣlaḥah 'āmmah). Based on these findings, the article proposes a post-treaty hybrid enforcement model combining differentiated enforcement, inter-institutional verification, and graduated sanctions. This model offers a proportionate approach by avoiding both normative symbolism without coercive force and automatic patent revocation. The article contributes a comparative typology of sanction design and its institutional consequences, while extending origin-disclosure scholarship through a Shari'ah-based analysis of justice and equitable benefit-sharing across diverse legal systems.
Conditional Death Penalty in the Indonesian National Criminal Code as an Effort to Bridge Legal Certainty and Human Rights Protection Syarif Fadillah; Efridani Lubis; Fachrudin Fachrudin
Smart Society Vol. 6 No. 3 (2026): Smart Society
Publisher : FOUNDAE (Foundation of Advanced Education)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58524/smartsoc.v6i3.1465

Abstract

The conditional death penalty under the Indonesian National Criminal Code represents a significant transformation in Indonesia’s capital punishment policy by repositioning the death penalty as a special punishment subject to a probationary mechanism and possible sentence commutation. This study examines the legal construction and position of the conditional death penalty, evaluates its compatibility with the requirements of legal certainty and human rights protection, analyzes its role as a normative compromise between retention and abolition, and identifies the principal regulatory and institutional challenges affecting its implementation. The study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and human rights approaches. The analysis draws on the Indonesian National Criminal Code and its subsequent legislative developments, relevant criminal law doctrines, and international human rights instruments. The findings show that the conditional death penalty constitutes a distinct sentencing model in which capital punishment is retained while its execution is subjected to additional legal conditions and the possibility of sentence conversion. From the perspective of legal certainty, its effectiveness depends on clear and objective assessment criteria, defined institutional authority, predictable procedures, and adequate mechanisms of review. From a human rights perspective, the possibility of commutation may provide an additional safeguard for the right to life and human dignity, but postponement of execution alone is insufficient to ensure substantive protection. The study further finds that the conditional death penalty can be understood as an intermediate normative model between conventional retention and abolition, although its legitimacy depends on the quality of the legal and institutional safeguards governing its implementation. Accordingly, strengthening the regulatory framework requires objective evaluation standards, clearly allocated institutional responsibilities, transparent procedures, effective oversight, and conformity with national and international human rights standards. This study contributes to Indonesian criminal law scholarship by providing an integrated normative framework for evaluating the conditional death penalty through the interconnected dimensions of legal certainty, human rights protection, institutional accountability, and procedural safeguards.