<![CDATA[The formation of Indonesia's Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation, known as the Omnibus Law, was marked by minimal public participation and was later declared conditionally unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court for violating formal procedural requirements. Amid this democratic deficit, civil society organizations, particularly Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (YLBHI), played a central role in resisting the policy through various advocacy channels. This study aims to analyze the lobbying and negotiation strategies employed by YLBHI in responding to the formation of the Omnibus Law, including their effectiveness and the structural obstacles encountered. The research uses a qualitative case study approach through library research, employing content and document analysis based on the model of Miles et al. (2014). Data sources include official legal documents, the Constitutional Court's Decision No. 91/PUU XVIII/2020, YLBHI publications, scholarly journals, and mass media reports. The analysis draws on theories of lobbying, principled negotiation, and the Advocacy Coalition Framework. The findings reveal that YLBHI combined inside strategies, such as lawsuits to the State Administrative Court, appeals, and cassation, with outside strategies including press releases, public campaigns, and issue framing, while also initiating the Tim Advokasi untuk Demokrasi coalition. Although these efforts did not change the substance of the law, they succeeded in establishing a new constitutional standard on meaningful participation, despite persistent barriers such as limited institutional access, government unresponsiveness, an unfavorable negotiating position, and significant resource asymmetry with pro-investment coalitions.]]>
