Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Beyond Family Law: Reconstructing Family Justice through Women’s and Children’s Rights Emi Puasa Handayani; Zainal Arifin; Zico Junius Fernando; Zaid Bin Mohamad; Naufal Ghani Bayhaqi
De Jure: Jurnal Hukum dan Syari'ah Vol 18, No 2 (2026)
Publisher : Shariah Faculty UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18860/j-fsh.v18i2.38190

Abstract

This article analyses the nexus between Indonesian family law and the legal protection of women and children within a human rights framework. Although family law regulates marriage, divorce, spousal relations, parental authority, custody, and maintenance, its implementation is often affected by patriarchal norms, regulatory disharmony, and weak protection mechanisms for vulnerable family members. This study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The statutory analysis examines the Marriage Law, Child Protection Law, Domestic Violence Law, Sexual Violence Crimes Law, and the Compilation of Islamic Law, while the case approach studies the Constitutional Court Decision No. 22/PUU-XV/2017 on the minimum marriage age and Religious Court practice concerning marriage dispensation, post-divorce custody or hadhanah, and domestic violence in marital relations. The article argues that women’s and children’s protection law functions beyond merely as a complementary regime; it serves as a corrective framework for family law when private family relations lead to discrimination, violence, unsafe custody, or child vulnerability. The findings show that Indonesian family law reform should be directed toward regulatory harmonisation, gender-responsive reconstruction of family norms, stricter judicial control over marriage dispensation, child-centred custody standards based on the best interests of the child, and integrated protection mechanisms for victims of domestic and sexual violence. This article contributes to the development of a human rights-based model of family law reform that aligns gender equality, child protection, Religious Court practice, and the protection of vulnerable groups in family justice.
Journalist Liability for Breaches of Good Faith under Indonesian Press Law Zainal Arifin; Emi Puasa Handayani; Herlina Manullang; Zico Junius Fernando
LITIGASI Vol. 27 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pasundan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23969/litigasi.v27i1.32353

Abstract

This article aims to explore the conflict between the good faith values of press law and the criminal liability implications in journalism within the wide-open context of such vague norms as they exist in Indonesia. Right of legal protection for journalist was guaranteed by Law Number 40 of 1999 on the Press, but this law had no operational criteria concerning whether acts of journalism are carried out in good faith or not. The absence of consistently interpreting such rulings has resulted in confusion molding law enforcement agencies. They lack a universal definition, and would especially fall under defamation, false information and electronic communication offences. This article is primarily a normative juridical one, which, with the support of various research methods including statute, conceptual, case and comparative methods, aims to argue that the good faith should not be perceived as just an abstract moral value but rather as a legal doctrine that could limit the journalist criminal liability. This leads to the definition of signs of bona fides as reasonable verification, balance of sources, orientation towards public interest, lack of malice intention, journalistic precaution, and willingness to be corrected or right-of-reply. This article develops a model of press freedom law in Indonesia that could integrate journalism ethics with the criminal accountability of journalists. It argues that the prosecution of journalists should be a last resort and is only warranted in cases of "intentional falsity, actual malice, or reckless disregard for the truth".