Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Analysis of the Synergy of the Penta Helix Model in Handling COVID-19 at the Pekanbaru City Level Ardiansyah Ardiansyah; Suparto Suparto; Wira Atma Hajri; M. Rafi; Pahmi Amri
Journal of Contemporary Governance and Public Policy Vol. 4 No. 1 (2023): (April 2023)
Publisher : Pusat Penelitian Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora Kontemporer, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.46507/jcgpp.v4i1.88

Abstract

The government has a crucial role in the management of COVID-19 since it is a leader. However, to speed up breaking the chain of transmission of COVID-19, the government needs various solutions from various stakeholders, considering that the COVID-19 pandemic is a broad problem and all parties are required to work together to achieve this goal. This study aims to explain the influencing factors and implications of the Penta Helix synergy in handling COVID-19 at the Pekanbaru City Level. This study then used a qualitative analysis method with Nvivo 12 Plus as an analytical tool to help visualise data from online media. The findings of this study indicate that the factors that influence the synergy of the Penta Helix model in handling COVID-19 at the Pekanbaru City Level include the role of government, involvement, and equality between actors, joint decision-making processes, formal organization, consensus, and collaboration factors in problem-solving. Then, the synergy of the Penta Helix model in handling COVID-19 in Pekanbaru City has two impacts, namely, the implications for developing the spirit of cooperation and accelerating the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic in Pekanbaru City. The implications of this research provide a reference for the importance of strengthening actor synergy based on a systematic mapping of the balance of roles of each stakeholder to optimally contribute to handling COVID-19 at the Pekanbaru City Level.
Enhancing External Oversight of Constitutional Judges: A Study on the Role of the Judicial Commission in Indonesia and South Korea Suparto Suparto; Kim Hyeonsoo; David Hardiago; Rani Fadhila Syafrinaldi
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 8 No. 1 (2024): Contemporary Legal Challenges and Solutions in a Global Context
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v8i1.14140

Abstract

This study addresses the urgent need for enhanced external oversight of constitutional judges in Indonesia and South Korea, driven by increasing concerns over judicial integrity and accountability. Recent instances of judicial misconduct and rising public dissatisfaction highlight the necessity for effective mechanisms that ensure transparency and ethical conduct among judges. The research investigates the roles and effectiveness of the Judicial Commissions in both countries, providing critical insights into their operations and impacts on judicial oversight. By employing a comparative approach, the study reveals the strengths and weaknesses of each commission’s framework, focusing on ethical guidelines, disciplinary processes, and public engagement strategies. It identifies best practices that could be adapted or improved to enhance judicial oversight, thereby fostering greater public trust in the legal system. The findings indicate that while both commissions aim to uphold judicial integrity, their effectiveness is influenced by contextual factors such as political dynamics and public perception. Additionally, this study explores the implementation of external oversight for Constitutional Judges in Indonesia, particularly in light of the establishment of the Constitutional Court following the 1945 Constitution amendment. Given the court’s crucial role in upholding constitutionalism, the exclusion of constitutional judges from oversight mechanisms is untenable. The Judicial Commission emerges as the most suitable body for external supervision, yet prior legislative efforts to integrate constitutional judges under its purview have been invalidated by the Constitutional Court. To rectify this, the study recommends amending Article 24B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution to explicitly include "Constitutional Judges." This amendment is essential to ensure that all judges, including constitutional judges, are subject to the same level of external scrutiny. Ultimately, this research contributes to the broader discourse on judicial independence and accountability, offering actionable recommendations to strengthen oversight institutions and foster a more resilient judiciary in both Indonesia and South Korea.