cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
WAHID FATHONI
Contact Email
wafathoni@gmail.com
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
iclr@umy.ac.id
Editorial Address
Faculty of Law Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, 2nd Floor, Gedung Ki Bagus Hadikusumo E-5, Jalan Brawijaya, Tamantirto, Kasihan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Location
Kab. bantul,
Daerah istimewa yogyakarta
INDONESIA
Indonesian Comparative Law Review
Published by Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta
ISSN : 26552353     EISSN : 26556545     DOI : 10.18196/iclr
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Indonesian Comparative Law Review (ICLR) (ISSN: 2655-2353, E-ISSN:2655-6545 is a periodical scientific-journal published by the Faculty of Law, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta in collaboration with the Indonesian Association of Comparative Laws. The journal will be published twice a year in December and June. ICLR’s vision is to be a leading scientific journal in comparative law. ICLR has a unique approach in creating innovative discourse on harmonization among legal systems. ICLR will receive many articles from legal scholars from reputable universities worldwide.
Arjuna Subject : Umum - Umum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol 1, No 2: June 2019" : 5 Documents clear
Development of Land Conflict Settlement Model Based on Indigenous Knowledge of the Local Communities in Indonesia Sunarno, Sunarno
Indonesian Comparative Law Review Vol 1, No 2: June 2019
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/iclr.1211

Abstract

Land conflict has become a classic issue in Indonesia and an effective dispute settlement seems to be urgent. The study aims at evaluating the possibility to incorporate the indigenous knowledge of the local communities in land dispute settlement system. This socio-legal research employs both qualitative and quantitative approach.It is found that the current legal and institutional systems are not in accordance with the legal consciousness of the Indonesian society. The purposes of agrarian policy have been controlled by the domination of the state over the people’s rights. The policies were made to safeguard the interests of elite and its supporters and at the same times ignore the society interests. As the old model of land dispute settlement, the Dutch procedural law (HIR) served the colonial interest. In fact, there are statutory provisions in the sector of natural resources and land that regulate land dispute settlement that accommodate the local wisdom. In addition, article 18 of the 1945 Constitution and Article 5 of the Basic Agrarian Law explicitly recognize the capacity of the indigenous people in settling land dispute. However it needs further elaboration and institutionalization of their values. The development of a legal system model based on local community wisdom is a must which it means a legal system that is incorporated from the value of the original legal system of the Indonesian nation. The Indonesian customary legal system rests on the concept of regional values that exist throughout Indonesia regions.
Employment Arrangement for Person with Disabilities in Indonesia in Post-New Order Era Dewi W, Imma Indra
Indonesian Comparative Law Review Vol 1, No 2: June 2019
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/iclr.1207

Abstract

The right to employment  of persons with disabilities  got better attentions in Indonesia, especially after the fall of the New Order era. This paper discusses the employment arrangement for persons with disabilities in Indonesia in Post-New Order era.  It is found that some reforms have been made to accealerate the fulfillment of  the right to employment  of persons with disabilities. It began with the enactment of Law Number 21 of 2002 on Labour Union  and Law Number 13 of 2003 on Employment. In addition, the Government had ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities through Law Number 19 of 2011. Furthermore, Law Number 8 of 2016 on Person with Disabilities was issued. This law has properly regulated the rights of persons with disabilities, including their employment rights. Nevertheless, this law still requires several comprehensive operational regulations.  Law Number 13 of 2003 can be synchronized with Law Number 8 of 2016 since it functions as a guideline for employers and workers in carrying out working relationship. 
The Salad Days of the EU Digital Service Tax Nugroho, Adrianto Dwi
Indonesian Comparative Law Review Vol 1, No 2: June 2019
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/iclr.1208

Abstract

Responding to a series of aggressive tax planning allegedly committed by multinational corporations running their businesses on digital platforms, states have drafted laws that would enable them to impose additional taxes on such corporations. In the EU, the proposal for a Council Directive on the Digital Services Tax (DST) projects for a 3% tax chargeable on the revenues generated by corporations surpassing a certain threshold of global and EU yearly revenues. The initial plan is to tax these corporations with respect to their online placement of advertising, enabling of online marketplaces, and sales of collected user data. While the EU organs are still undergoing the due legislative processes on the proposal, two flaws of the DST may be argued, namely that it conflates features of direct taxes (i.e. income tax) with that of indirect taxes (i.e. value added tax); and that it embeds covert discriminatory measures against certain multinational corporations. The maturation of the DST depends on the formulation of sound legal principles and ingenious concept which would hallmark a DST regime from the corporate income tax one.
Facing the Industrial Revolution 4.0: Taiwanese and Indonesian Perspective Hardyanthi, Try; Al Ghozali, Falah; Wahyu, Muhammad Arizka
Indonesian Comparative Law Review Vol 1, No 2: June 2019
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/iclr.1209

Abstract

Industrial Revolution 4.0 offers both challenges and opportunities for all countries. Every country has to adopt best strategies to deal with its dynamic and complexity. This paper aims at discussing the legal policies adopted by Indonesia and Taiwan to face this industrial revolution. This research employs a descriptive- qualitative method with comparative approach. It is found that Industrial Rrevolution 4.0, also known as the intelligent industry, seeks to transform a company into an intelligent organization to achieve the best business results. Indonesia officially launched the road-map called “Making Indonesia 4.0” in 2018. In the same year, Indonesia has started to set up the main plain of the program for five focuses sectors ex: food and drink, textile and clothing, automotive, chemist and electronic, and additional ten cross priority sectors. While Taiwan proposed its own version of Industry 4.0 called “Productivity 4.0” in 2014. This includes the use of large quantity of robots and production lines, the automation of manufacturing procedures, the introduction of Industry 4.0 and Internet of Things (IoT) technology, and cloud computing for immediate data processing. It makes Industry 4.0 as the national policy for industrial transformation.
Unitary, Federalized, or Decentralized?: The Case Study of Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta as the Special Autonomous Regions in Indonesia Sung, Ming-Hsi; Hakim, Hary Abdul
Indonesian Comparative Law Review Vol 1, No 2: June 2019
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/iclr.1210

Abstract

The professed constitutional unitary state claim has been highly debated.  Some argue that Indonesia shall be a unitary state in name, pursuant to Article 1 Para. III of the Indonesian Constitution, but Constitutional reforms after 1998 when the autocratic President Gen. Soeharto stepped down granted broad authority to local government, leading Indonesia to a quasi-federation situation in practice. On the other hand, some stick to the aforementioned Article, insisting that decentralization embedded in the Constitution Article 18 Para. II is by no means making Indonesia federal.  This article takes the Act No. 13 of 2012 on Special Region of Yogyakarta (the Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta) granting autonomy to Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta as a case study to argue for the latter, asserting that the case merely exemplifies the decentralization characteristic embedded in the Constitution. This paper first examines the political features of federalism through a historical legal perspective, showing that the current state system in Indonesia is decentralized but not federalized. This paper concludes  that the recognition of Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta as an autonomous region is simply a practice of constitutional decentralization. This paper also higlights that with recent political development, echoing that the decentralization theory is not a product of legal interpretation, but a constitutional and political reality.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2019 2019


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 7 No. 2 (2025) Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024) Vol 6, No 2 (2024) Vol. 6 No. 2 (2024) Vol 6, No 1 (2023) Vol 5, No 2 (2023) Vol 5, No 1 (2022) Vol 4, No 2 (2022) Vol 4, No 1 (2021) Vol 3, No 2 (2021) Vol 3, No 2: June 2021 Vol 3, No 1 (2020) Vol 3, No 1: December 2020 Vol 2, No 2 (2020) Vol 2, No 2: June 2020 Vol 2, No 1: December 2019 Vol 2, No 1 (2019) Vol 1, No 2: June 2019 Vol 1, No 2 (2019) Vol 1, No 1 (2018) Vol 1, No 1: December 2018 More Issue