cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Yusuf Saefudin
Contact Email
yusuf.saefudin12@ump.ac.id
Phone
+6285647946633
Journal Mail Official
kosmikhukum@ump.ac.id
Editorial Address
Jl. K.H. Ahmad Dahlan, Purwokerto, Jawa Tengah Indonesia, 53182
Location
Kab. banyumas,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Kosmik Hukum
Published by Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto
ISSN : 14119781     EISSN : 26559242     DOI : 10.30595/jkh
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
Kosmik Hukum adalah jurnal peer reviewed dan Open-Acces yang diterbitkan oleh Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto. Kosmik Hukum mengundang para peneliti, dosen, dan praktisi di seluruh dunia untuk bertukar dan memajukan keilmuan di bidang hukum yang meliputi berbagai aspek hukum seperti Hukum Pidana, Hukum Perdata, Hukum Tata Negara, Hukum Administrasi Negara, Hukum Acara, Hukum Bisnis, dan sebagainya. Dokumen yang dikirim harus dalam format Ms. Word dan ditulis sesuai dengan panduan penulisan. Kosmik Hukum terbit dua kali dalam setahun pada bulan Januari dan Juli.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 15 Documents
 1   2 
Search results for , issue "Vol. 26 No. 1 (2026)" : 15 Documents clear
Legal Protection in App-Based Transportation Partnerships and Consumers in Indonesia Desril, Raja; Santoso, Mulia Akbar
Kosmik Hukum Vol. 26 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i1.28769

Abstract

The app-based transportation sector, such as Gojek and Grab, has rapidly developed in Indonesia, yet it still faces significant challenges regarding the legal regulations governing the partnership between platform providers and driver partners. The lack of clear legal norms has led to uncertainty regarding the rights and obligations of both parties, which ultimately reduces legal protection for both drivers and consumers. This study aims to analyze how Indonesia's legal system regulates this partnership and evaluate the extent to which existing regulations provide adequate protection for drivers and consumers. The main research questions address how Indonesia's legal system governs partnerships in this sector and to what extent the regulations support the principle of justice. The research method used is normative legal research, employing legislative, conceptual, and theoretical approaches. The findings show that Indonesia's legal system has not provided sufficient legal certainty in these partnerships. Protection for both drivers and consumers remain limited, particularly regarding labor rights and dispute resolution mechanisms. This study suggests the need for clearer and more detailed regulatory reforms to create a more equitable and transparent relationship between companies, drivers, and consumers.
Comparative Study of Mediation Practices in Financial Disputes Between Indonesia’s LAPS SJK and Singapore’s FIDReC Framework Handriyanto Wijaya; Dewi Sulistianingsih; Irawaty
Kosmik Hukum Vol. 26 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i1.29031

Abstract

This article conducts a doctrinal and comparative analysis of Indonesia’s LAPS-SJK and Singapore’s FIDReC to examine how institutional design shapes fairness, accessibility, and legitimacy in financial dispute resolution. Drawing on normative legal methods and qualitative thematic analysis, the study evaluates each institution’s governance structure, mediation model, procedural architecture, transparency practices, and enforcement mechanisms. The comparison shows that the two bodies are grounded in distinct regulatory logics that produce markedly different capacities to mitigate information asymmetry in financial disputes. LAPS-SJK adopts a facilitative mediation model that emphasises party autonomy and mediator neutrality. In practice, however, this approach proves inadequate in an environment where consumers face complex financial products and substantial informational disadvantages. The absence of evaluative guidance, combined with a single-tier dispute-resolution structure, limited transparency, and weak enforcement, often restricts consumers’ ability to secure substantively fair outcomes. These features risk reinforcing rather than correcting existing power imbalances. FIDReC, by contrast, employs a hybrid mediation model that permits evaluative input and is supported by a two-tier system in which adjudication operates as a safeguard against unfair settlements. Its robust transparency regime—featuring detailed annual reports and anonymised case summaries—enhances institutional accountability and predictability. Binding outcomes backed by MAS oversight further strengthen compliance and user confidence. The study concludes that effective financial dispute resolution requires more than statutory mandates; it depends on institutional capacity, regulatory coherence, and mechanisms that actively address structural inequalities. The contrasting experiences of LAPS-SJK and FIDReC highlight the importance of transparency, evaluative support, and enforceability in promoting procedural justice and institutional legitimacy.
Strengthening Indonesia’s Financial Consumer Protection Framework: A Comparative Analysis of the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Tri Herdianto; Dewi Sulistianingsih; Pujiono
Kosmik Hukum Vol. 26 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i1.29055

Abstract

This research examines the legal standing and statutory authority of the Financial Services Authority (Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, OJK) to commence civil proceedings on behalf of consumers in Indonesia’s financial services sector, a mandate that has gained increasing relevance amid the expansion of complex financial products and digital delivery channels. Grounded in Law No. 21 of 2011 and its implementing regulations, OJK’s litigation power is conceptualised as a regulatory enforcement mechanism intended to address structural consumer disadvantages, strengthen institutional accountability, and promote compliance with market-conduct norms. The analysis situates this authority within broader doctrinal frameworks, including public interest litigation, administrative law principles, and regulatory enforcement theory. To provide comparative context, the article briefly contrasts OJK’s mandate with the enforcement powers of the United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), a leading model in consumer-focused financial regulation.  Using a normative juridical methodology, the article evaluates the practical effectiveness of OJK-initiated civil actions and compares them with alternative redress mechanisms, such as class actions. The findings indicate that despite a clear statutory foundation, OJK’s use of civil litigation remains limited by procedural uncertainties and institutional preferences for non-judicial approaches. Nevertheless, OJK-filed lawsuits hold significant potential to enhance remedial access, improve evidentiary processes, and create stronger deterrence against market misconduct. The study concludes that clearer procedural guidelines and strengthened institutional capacity are essential to optimise OJK’s role in consumer protection.
Evaluation of Legal Frameworks for Extremism Prevention in Indonesian Higher Education Agustin, Bunga Veronika Milania; Istiqomah, Milda; Jameelah, Mariyam
Kosmik Hukum Vol. 26 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i1.29408

Abstract

Extremism poses a serious challenge to Indonesia’s diversity and national stability, including within higher education institutions. This study aims to evaluate the legal framework governing the prevention of extremism in universities and examine its implementation at Brawijaya University as a case study. Using a socio-legal research method with a digital ethnography approach, the study draws on both primary and secondary data sources. Findings indicate that although several laws and regulations—such as the National Education System Law, the Higher Education Law, and the Presidential Regulation on the National Action Plan for Preventing Violent Extremism—have been established, they remain general and lack specific provisions addressing extremism prevention in higher education. Brawijaya University demonstrates a strong commitment through the issuance of rector regulations, integration of Pancasila values into the curriculum, implementation of nationalism-based student orientation (PKKMB), and partnerships with external bodies such as the Densus 88 counterterrorism unit. However, the absence of a dedicated institutional body to address extremism prevention represents a significant gap that hinders effective implementation. Therefore, the establishment of a specialized unit within each university is urgently needed to strengthen preventive efforts and ensure a safer academic environment.
Pretrial of the Seizure of Property Unrelated to Criminal Offenses: Between the Interests of Corruption Eradication and the Protection of Human Rights Wicaksana, Prasetyo Budi; Hassan, Fareed Mohd
Kosmik Hukum Vol. 26 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i1.29668

Abstract

Asset seizure in corruption cases is an important instrument in efforts to recover state financial losses. However, in law enforcement practice, seizures are often carried out against goods or property that have no causal relationship with the alleged criminal offense. This condition creates tension between the interest of eradicating corruption and the protection of human rights, particularly the right to property and the guarantee of due process of law. This article aims to analyze pretrial remedies against the seizure of property unrelated to corruption offenses from the perspectives of law enforcement and human rights protection in Indonesia. This study employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, particularly through an examination of pretrial decisions of the Pekanbaru District Court concerning asset seizures in alleged corruption cases. The results indicate that seizures not supported by evidence of a direct connection to the criminal offense potentially violate the principle of legality, the principle of proportionality, and the protection of human rights as guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and national human rights instruments. Pretrial mechanisms play a strategic role as a form of judicial control over arbitrary coercive measures. Therefore, reforms are required in the seizure application mechanism by emphasizing strict substantive review and strengthening the role of pretrial proceedings to create a balance between the effectiveness of corruption eradication and the protection of citizens’ constitutional rights within the Indonesian criminal justice system.

Page 2 of 2 | Total Record : 15

 1   2 

Filter by Year

2026 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 26 No. 1 (2026) Vol. 25 No. 2 (2025) Vol. 25 No. 1 (2025) Vol 25, No 1 (2025) Vol 24, No 3 (2024) Vol 24, No 2 (2024) Vol 24, No 1 (2024) Vol 23, No 3 (2023) Vol 23, No 2 (2023) Vol 23, No 1 (2023) Vol 22, No 3 (2022) Vol 22, No 2 (2022) Vol 22, No 1 (2022) Vol 21, No 3 (2021) Vol 21, No 2 (2021) Vol 21, No 1 (2021) Vol 20, No 2 (2020) Vol 20, No 1 (2020) Vol 19, No 2 (2019) Vol 19, No 1 (2019) Vol 18, No 2 (2018) Vol 18, No 1 (2018) Vol 17, No 2 (2017) Vol 17, No 1 (2017) Vol 16, No 2 (2016) Vol 16, No 1 (2016) Vol 14, No 2 (2014) Vol 14, No 1 (2014) Vol 13, No 2 (2013) Vol 13, No 1 (2013) Vol 12, No 2 (2012) Vol 12, No 1 (2012) Vol 11, No 2 (2011) Vol 11, No 1 (2011) More Issue