Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

The legal standing of the high prosecutor’s office as a mediator in the resolution of civil disputes between the government and civil society Farahadayune Naharani Poetry; Alhadiansyah Alhadiansyah; Angga Prihatin; Putri Tio Octaria Mangunsong; Olyfia Febryanti Marpaung
Priviet Social Sciences Journal Vol. 5 No. 12 (2025): December 2025
Publisher : Privietlab

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55942/pssj.v5i12.1113

Abstract

This study analyzes the legal status and institutional role of the Indonesian Prosecutor’s Office in mediating civil disputes between the government and civil society. Although the Prosecutor’s Office holds a sui generis position under national law—exercising prosecutorial powers alongside authority in civil and administrative matters—its structural placement within the executive branch raises concerns about neutrality and independence. The dual role of the Prosecutor’s Office as both mediator and State Attorney creates an inherent conflict of interest, potentially undermining the neutrality, procedural justice, and equality of arms essential to ADR. Drawing on doctrinal analysis and theories of procedural justice and separation of powers, this study argues that overlapping functions compromise mediation legitimacy. Public trust may decline when mediation is facilitated by an institution aligned with the disputing party. The study recommends limiting the Prosecutor’s Office to consultative functions, while substantive mediation should be handled by independent bodies. Clear functional demarcation and strengthened ethical guidelines are necessary to safeguard neutrality, accountability, and the rule of law.
Expansion of Functions and Role of Mediators in Polygamy Permit Cases to Enforce the Principles of Monogamy Alhadiansyah Alhadiansyah; Angga Prihatin; Sugeng Susila
Journal of Social Research Vol. 5 No. 3 (2026): Journal of Social Research
Publisher : International Journal Labs

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55324/josr.v5i3.3041

Abstract

Indonesian marriage law adheres to the principle of non-absolute monogamy, allowing polygamy with religious court permission. Although polygamy permit cases are categorized as disputes requiring mandatory mediation, mediation becomes unnecessary when both husband and wife have mutually agreed to the polygamy, as no actual dispute exists. In such situations, the mediation process risks overriding the principle of monogamy. The purpose of this article is to conduct a legal analysis of the implementation of mediation of polygamy permit applications in religious courts and to find solutions to uphold the application of the principle of monogamy at the mediation stage of polygamy permit applications. This article employs a normative juridical method, namely a study of the principles and norms in statutory regulations with an analytical approach, by analyzing legal materials to ascertain the meaning contained in the terms used in statutory regulations conceptually. The results of this research show that in polygamy permit applications where there is no dispute between the parties, the role of the mediator needs to be expanded to act as a negotiator to prioritize the principle of monogamy, as well as to prevent polygamy permit applications that are not in accordance with legal provisions from continuing in the examination process, as an implementation of the principles of administering justice that are simple, fast, and low-cost.