Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
3.546
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL MAGISTER HUKUM UDAYANA Jurnal Komunikasi Hukum Jurnal Media Hukum JURISDICTIE Jurnal Hukum dan Syariah Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies Legal Standing : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum TAHKIM Prosiding National Conference for Community Service Project Journal of Judicial Review Jurnal Fundamental Justice Law Development Journal Hang Tuah Law Journal Jurnal Hukum Pelita Conference on Community Engagement Project (Concept) Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Jurnal Mediasas : Media Ilmu Syari'ah dan Ahwal Al-Syakhsiyyah Syura: Journal of Law Lex Scientia Law Review
Windi Afdal, Windi
Universitas Internasional Batam
Arts Humanities Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

Published : 32 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 32 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4 
Unregulated Self-Preferencing in ASEAN Digital Platform Ecosystems Sudirman, Lu; Tan, David; Afdal, Windi; Fatihah, Nur; Hutauruk, Rufinus Hotmaulana
Syura: Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Sekolah Tinggi Agama Islam (STAI) Darul Ulum Banyuanyar Pamekasan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58223/syura.v4i1.810

Abstract

The rapid expansion of digital platforms in Southeast Asia has intensified concerns regarding self-preferencing practices within vertically integrated ecosystems, which often operate in opaque and difficult-to-detect forms. This study examines the inadequacy of existing antitrust frameworks in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam in addressing such anti-competitive conduct. The research aims to assess the normative sufficiency of these legal systems and identify regulatory gaps in tackling self-preferencing in digital markets. This study employs a doctrinal legal research method combined with a comparative approach. The findings reveal that all three jurisdictions face significant limitations, particularly due to the absence of explicit prohibitions on self-preferencing mechanisms to address algorithmic bias, particularly in its early stage. Indonesia demonstrates the most substantial deficiencies, while the Philippines and Vietnam offer relatively more flexible interpretative tools, albeit still insufficient in addressing the complexities of digital ecosystems. The study concludes that the current, primarily ex-post approach in the relevant frameworks needs to be supported by an ex-ante mechanism, which leads the study to recommend the introduction of explicit legal recognition of self-preferencing and expansion of vertical integration provisions, along with other safeguards to prevent further competitive damage from self-preferencing.
Studi Perbandingan Konsep Judicial Pardon berdasarkan KUHP Nasional Indonesia dan Negara Belanda Hendriwan; Windi Afdal; Ampuan Situmeang
Legal Standing : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol. 10 No. 2 (2026): Legal Standing
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Ponorogo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24269/ls.v10i2.13641

Abstract

This study aims to understand the concept of judicial pardon in the national Criminal Code, as well as to examine the comparative application of judicial pardon between Indonesia and the Netherlands. This research uses a normative legal research method, applying the statute approach, conceptual approach, comparative approach, and historical approach. Based on the research conducted, the findings are as follows: 1) In the existing legal system, the concept of judicial pardon is not yet recognized or implemented in Indonesia. The mechanism for granting pardon falls under the authority of the executive, namely the President, through the provision of clemency, amnesty, and abolition. Although judicial institutions, such as the Supreme Court, are involved in the consideration process, the final decision remains in the hands of the President. Therefore, it does not reflect the essential characteristic of judicial pardon, which originates from the judiciary itself. 2) The Dutch legal system has implemented the concept of judicial pardon, allowing active involvement of judicial institutions in the pardon-granting process. Although pardons are formally issued by the King, the decisions are based on strong judicial and administrative considerations.
Co-Authors Agustianto Agustianto, Agustianto Alda Petronella Dahana Theysen Alfis Setyawan Andy Lau Angel, Vanessa Anggriawan, Rizaldy Babyliany, Vanessa Carina Tan Chutia, Upankar Cicillia Chandra Putri Dandy Satyahadi Disemadi, Hari Sutra Etty Mulyati Fatihah, Nur Felicia felicia Fitri, Winda Fitri, Windi Haeruddin Haeruddin Haeruddin, . Hendriwan Henry Soelistyo Budi, Henry Soelistyo Hutauruk, Rufinus Hotmaulana Jaya, Febri Lau, Andy Librawenson, Winco Lu Sudirman Mbilinyi, Francis Daniel Miftahul Jannah Niken Dwi Anggawati NURLAILY, NURLAILY Nursyahda, Faradhilla Renny Supriyatni Bachro Risko Fitriano Rusdiana, Shelvi Silviani, Ninne Zahara Situmeang, Ampuan Tan, David Tan, Rosita Tan, Winsherly Taniady, Vicko Tarsisius Murwadji Wilda Lim WULAN PURNAMASARI, WULAN Yvonny Yvonny Zuraini Zuraini, Zuraini