Rustian Mushawirya
Faculty of Law, Universitas Jambi, Indonesia

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

Constitutional Asymmetry and Regional Tourism Governance: A Comparative Legal Analysis of Aceh and Yogyakarta Ivan Fauzani Raharja; Eko Nuriyatman; Rustian Mushawirya; Ratna Dewi
LITIGASI Vol. 26 No. 2 (2025)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pasundan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23969/litigasi.v26i2.43132

Abstract

This study addresses a gap in comparative legal scholarship on Indonesian tourism governance: existing studies predominantly examine Aceh’s halal tourism or Yogyakarta’s cultural tourism separately, while limited attention has been given to how differentiated constitutional arrangements shape regional tourism governance within the same decentralised legal system. The study aims to compare the legal foundations, regulatory orientations, institutional arrangements, and sustainability implications of tourism governance in Aceh and the Special Region of Yogyakarta (DIY). Using normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, the study analyses national and regional legislation, legal doctrine, and recent scholarly literature. Four parameters constitutional/legal foundation, regulatory orientation, institutional design, and sustainable-governance implications are applied systematically to both cases. The analysis finds that the same concurrent governmental authority over tourism under Law No. 23 of 2014 produces differentiated governance models because Aceh’s special autonomy embeds Islamic legal norms in regional regulation, whereas Yogyakarta’s special status embeds cultural preservation and integrated regional planning in tourism governance. The comparison demonstrates that constitutional asymmetry operates as a substantive variable in the design of regional tourism regulation rather than merely as a formal institutional distinction. The study’s novelty lies in connecting constitutional asymmetry with differentiated regional autonomy to explain why equivalent decentralised authority generates different tourism governance models. It recommends regulatory harmonisation, stronger inter-agency coordination, clearer implementing instruments, and participatory mechanisms that preserve regional constitutional identity while ensuring legal certainty and sustainable community welfare.
Digital Fiscal Accountability under Indonesian Administrative Law: A Framework for AI-Driven Regional Budget Governance Fitria Fitria; Eko Nuriyatman; Firdaus Arifin; Rahayu Repindowaty Harahap; Hanif Hardianto; Siti Fatimah; Rustian Mushawirya
Jurnal Suara Hukum Vol. 8 No. 2 (2026): Jurnal Suara Hukum
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Surabaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26740/jsh.v8n2.p324-353

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used to support public-sector fiscal analysis. Yet, its integration into regional budgeting creates a legal problem that existing Indonesian administrative-law arrangements do not expressly resolve: how AI-generated recommendations may be used without transferring legally binding decision-making authority from public officials to algorithmic systems. This article examines the normative conditions for using AI as a decision-support instrument in regional budget governance. It develops a digital fiscal accountability framework for addressing fiscal turbulence, transparency, responsibility, and reviewability. The research uses a normative juridical method based on statutory and conceptual approaches. Primary legal materials are analyzed to identify rules and principles concerning governmental authority, administrative procedure, accountability, data protection, and digital government, while secondary literature is used to construct the conceptual relationship between administrative law and algorithmic governance. The analysis finds that AI may improve fiscal forecasting, anomaly detection, and scenario analysis, but these benefits do not make AI an autonomous administrative decision-maker. The proposed framework therefore requires human validation, traceable decision records, data-quality controls, algorithmic auditability, contestability, and a clear allocation of responsibility among officials, institutions, and technology providers. Digital fiscal accountability is proposed as a normative reconstruction that connects existing administrative-law principles with AI-specific safeguards rather than as a claim that Indonesian law already comprehensively regulates AI-driven budgeting.