cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Mochammad Tanzil Multazam
Contact Email
tanzilmultazam@umsida.ac.id
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
p3i@umsida.ac.id
Editorial Address
Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo Majapahit 666 B, Sidoarjo, East Java Indonesia
Location
Kab. sidoarjo,
Jawa timur
INDONESIA
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review
Published by Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo
ISSN : -     EISSN : 25989928     DOI : https://doi.org/10.21070/ijler
Core Subject : Economy, Social,
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review (IJLER) is published by Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo four times a year. This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.This journal aims is to provide a place for academics and practitioners to publish original research and review articles. The articles basically contains any topics concerning Law and Economics. IJLER is available in online version. Language used in this journal is Indonesia or English.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 618 Documents
 58   59   60   61   62 
The Urgency of Policy Formulation in the Criminalization of Online Gambling: Urgensi Kebijakan Formulasi dalam Tindak Pidana Judi Online Wong, Sherryl Naomi; Adhari, Ade
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1405

Abstract

The rapid advancement of digital technology has transformed traditional forms of crime into sophisticated cyber-based offenses, including online gambling, which has become increasingly prevalent in Indonesia. Specifically, the application of Article 303 of the Criminal Code—designed for conventional, physical gambling—proves inadequate for addressing the borderless, anonymous, and technologically complex nature of digital gambling. The knowledge gap lies in the absence of explicit legal provisions regulating online gambling, resulting in inconsistent interpretations, reliance on prohibited analogical reasoning, and weakened legal certainty. This study aims to analyze current punishment practices for online gambling and assess the urgency of reformulating criminal law policies that align with contemporary technological realities. The results reveal that enforcement often stretches Article 303 beyond its intended scope, violating the principle of legality and producing ineffective sanctions that fail to reflect the social and economic harms of digital gambling. The novelty of this research lies in its integrated evaluation of doctrinal deficiencies, judicial practices, and theoretical foundations of criminalization within Indonesia’s evolving cybercrime landscape. The implications underline the urgent need for explicit statutory regulation of online gambling to ensure legal certainty, enhance law-enforcement effectiveness, and strengthen societal protection in the digital era. Highlights: Online gambling grows rapidly while outdated laws fail to regulate digital mechanisms. Applying Article 303 KUHP to cyber-based gambling often violates the legality principle. Urgent legal reform is needed to ensure clarity, effectiveness, and proportional sanctions. Keywords: Online Gambling, Criminal Policy, Legality Principle, Cybercrime Regulation, Legal Reform
Implications of Disparities in District Court and Supreme Court Decisions in Realizing Justice: Implikasi Disparitas Putusan Pengadilan Negeri dan Mahkamah Agung dalam Mewujudkan Keadilan Tarnama, Eins Mitchelle; Prasetyo, Boedi
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1406

Abstract

The general background of this study lies in the central importance of judicial consistency in upholding legal certainty within Indonesia’s criminal justice system. The specific background concerns the contrasting outcomes in the Gregorius Ronald Tannur case, where the Surabaya District Court acquitted the defendant while the Supreme Court later imposed a prison sentence, revealing potential procedural irregularities and integrity issues within the judiciary. The knowledge gap emerges from the limited scholarly examination that systematically connects judicial disparity with its legal, institutional, and socio-justice implications. This study aims to analyze the disparity between Decision No. 454/Pid.B/2024/PN.Sby and Decision No. 1466/K/Pid/2024, and to evaluate its impact on public trust, legal certainty, and judicial accountability. The results show that differences in legal interpretation, assessment of evidence, procedural deviations, and external influences contribute significantly to the disparity, with substantial consequences for the perception of justice. The novelty of this research lies in offering an integrated normative–comparative analysis that links judicial reasoning, structural weaknesses, and ethical considerations within one evaluative framework. The implications emphasize the urgent need for strengthened judicial supervision, clearer sentencing guidelines, and systemic reforms to ensure fairness, transparency, and the restoration of public confidence in Indonesia’s legal system. Highlights: Highlights how differing court decisions undermine legal certainty and consistency. Emphasizes the role of judicial integrity in maintaining public confidence. Identifies the need for stronger oversight and clearer sentencing guidelines. Keywords: Judicial Disparity, Legal Certainty, Judicial Integrity, Sentencing Inconsistency, Public Trust
The Effectiveness of Regulating Pre-Existing Conditions in Life Insurance Policies as a Risk-Mitigation Mechanism for Insurance Companies in Indonesia: Efektivitas Pengaturan Pre-Existing Condition dalam Polis Asuransi Jiwa Sebagai Mekanisme Mitigasi Risiko Perusahaan Asuransi di Indonesia Awuy, Euginia Nataniela; Gunadi, Ariawan
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1408

Abstract

Background: Life insurance plays a crucial role in balancing financial protection and risk management, where pre-existing condition clauses function to maintain fairness between premium payments and actual risks borne by insurers. Specific Background: In Indonesia, the implementation of these clauses often triggers disputes due to inconsistent interpretations, lack of regulatory standardization, and low public literacy regarding insurance contracts. Knowledge Gap: Despite their importance, limited studies examine how effectively these clauses mitigate risk while maintaining legal certainty amid regulatory ambiguity and practical challenges in underwriting and proof. Aim: This study evaluates the effectiveness of pre-existing condition clauses as a risk-mitigation mechanism for Indonesian life insurance companies. Results: Findings show that these clauses prevent adverse selection, strengthen utmost good faith, and support accurate underwriting, though effectiveness is hindered by unclear definitions, uneven documentation, agent miscommunication, and difficulties in proving prior illnesses. Novelty: This research integrates legal, technical, and consumer-protection perspectives to identify systemic weaknesses that reduce clause enforceability. Implications: Strengthening regulatory standards, improving transparency, and enhancing underwriting systems are essential to reduce disputes and reinforce legal certainty in life insurance governance. Highlights: Evaluates how pre-existing condition clauses function as a core risk-mitigation tool in Indonesian life insurance. Highlights legal and practical challenges, including regulatory gaps, proof difficulties, and low insurance literacy. Recommends strengthening regulation, transparency, and underwriting systems to reduce disputes and enhance legal certainty. Keywords: Pre-Existing Condition, Life Insurance, Risk Mitigation, Legal Certainty, Underwriting
Proof of Intent in Aiding and Abetting a Criminal Act in Medan District Court Decision Number 882/Pid.B/2024/PN Mdn: Pembuktian Pemenuhan Unsur Kesengajaan Pembantuan Tindak Pidana Pada Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Medan Nomor 882/Pid.B/2024/PN Mdn Arrifa, Reisa; Adhari, Ade
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1409

Abstract

General Background: Accomplice liability under Article 56 of the Indonesian Criminal Code requires proof of intent, reflected in the accomplice’s knowledge and will to facilitate a crime. Specific Background: In Decision No. 882/Pid.B/2024/PN Mdn, the court concluded that intent in accomplice liability was not established, despite evidence showing the defendant knowingly created and transferred mobile banking accounts to a fraud perpetrator for financial gain. Knowledge Gap: Existing studies rarely examine inconsistencies between doctrinal constructions of intent and their judicial application in accomplice liability within fraud cases. Aims: This study analyzes how the element of intent in accomplice liability was assessed and whether the court’s reasoning aligns with criminal law doctrine. Results: Findings indicate that the defendant’s conduct demonstrates knowledge and purposeful assistance fulfilling the subjective elements of fraud under Article 378 KUHP and the intent requirement of Article 56 KUHP. Novelty: This study provides a doctrinal–case analysis showing that judicial misinterpretation of intent can blur the distinction between neutral acts and intentional facilitation. Implications: The results highlight the need for consistent judicial application of mens rea principles to maintain the integrity of criminal responsibility and prevent erroneous exclusions of accomplice liability. Highlights: The case reveals a doctrinal inconsistency in assessing intent for accomplice liability. Evidence shows the defendant’s actions met the subjective elements of fraud. Misinterpretation of mens rea risks weakening the boundaries of criminal responsibility. Keywords: Accomplice Liability, Intent, Article 378 KUHP, Proof, Participation in Crime
A Critical Analysis of the Fulfillment of the Intent Element in the Dissemination of Private Content under the Electronic Information and Transactions Crime, Based on Decision No. 805/Pid.Sus.2024/PN.Jkt.Sel.: Analisis Kritis Pemenuhan Unsur Kesengajaan Penyebarluasaan Konten Pribadi Dalam Tindak Pidana ITE Studi Putusan Nomor 805/Pid.Sus.2024/PN.Jkt.Sel Rambe, Halgi Sujuangon Jhansen; Adhari, Ade
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1410

Abstract

General Background: The rapid advancement of digital technology has increased legal challenges related to electronic information misuse, particularly within Indonesia’s Special Criminal Law governing Electronic Information and Transactions (EIT). Specific Background: Cases involving the dissemination of private content frequently raise questions regarding the fulfillment of intent or dolus as a requirement for criminal liability. Knowledge Gap: Judicial inconsistencies in assessing intent—especially in distinguishing intentional acts from negligence—indicate the need for deeper doctrinal analysis. Aims: This study critically examines the fulfillment of intent in the dissemination of private content under Article 27 ayat 1 jo. Article 45 ayat 1 of the EIT Law, based on Decision No. 805/Pid.Sus.2024/PN.Jkt.Sel. Results: The findings show that the court’s analysis relied on three key elements: actus reus, the absence of rights or consent, and mens rea reflected in the perpetrator’s awareness of wrongdoing, while also considering the defendant’s negligence or culpa. Novelty: This study exposes discrepancies between courtroom facts and judicial reasoning, revealing conceptual misalignment in applying intent within EIT cases. Implications: The research provides a clearer analytical framework for judges and legal practitioners to differentiate intentional wrongdoing from negligence in future EIT adjudications. Highlights: The study clarifies how intent is assessed in private-content dissemination cases under the EIT Law. Findings show discrepancies between courtroom facts and the court’s interpretation of intent. The research offers a clearer framework for distinguishing intent from negligence in future cases. Keywords: Intent, Negligence, EIT Law, Private Content, Criminal Liability
Public View as an Aggravating Factor in Joint Violence According to Article 170 Paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code: Vis Publica Sebagai Pertimbangan Pemberat Pidana dalam Kekerasan Bersama Menurut Pasal 170 Ayat (2) KUHP Purba, Gilbert; Rahaditya, Rahaditya
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1411

Abstract

General Background: Violence committed collectively poses broader social risks because it disrupts public order and triggers wider societal anxiety. Specific Background: In Indonesian criminal law, vis publica in Pasal 170 KUHP functions as a key qualifier distinguishing ordinary assault from public-order crimes, yet its judicial interpretation remains inconsistent. Knowledge Gap: Existing scholarship has not clarified how vis publica should operate as a basis for sentencing aggravation under Pasal 170 ayat (2) KUHP, nor how judges should evaluate its causal relevance to social disturbance. Aims: This study analyzes the juridical status of vis publica as a judicial consideration in imposing aggravated penalties for collective violence. Results: Findings show that vis publica acts as a legal threshold for classifying the offense as a public-order crime, but it only justifies aggravated sentencing when judges demonstrate its concrete contribution to expanding social harm. Novelty: This research formulates a structured reasoning model requiring judges to link public visibility with measurable disturbance before escalating punishment. Implications: Strengthening doctrinal clarity on vis publica supports proportional sentencing, enhances legal certainty, and improves consistency in judicial decision-making in collective-violence cases. Highlights: Vis publica is the legal threshold that transforms individual assault into a public-order crime. Aggravated sentencing requires a proven causal link between public visibility and expanded social harm. Judicial reasoning must be structured, proportional, and grounded in measurable disturbance. Keywords: Vis Publica, Pasal 170 KUHP, Collective Violence, Sentencing Aggravation, Public Order.
The Principle of Judges in Determining the Validity of Grounds for Criminal Expungement in the Criminal Justice System in Indonesia: Prinsip Hakim dalam Menentukan Sah Tidaknya Alasan Penghapus Pidana Pada Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia Nasrullah, Mochammad Ridho; Hutabarat, Rugun Romaida
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1412

Abstract

General Background: Grounds for the exclusion of criminal liability serve as essential mechanisms within Indonesian criminal law to ensure that punishment is not imposed automatically when the elements of a crime are fulfilled, but instead aligned with substantive justice. Specific Background: Although Articles 48–51 of the Criminal Code regulate justifying and excusing grounds, judicial practice demonstrates variations in how judges assess their validity. Knowledge Gap: Limited scholarship has comprehensively explained the principles applied by judges in determining whether these grounds are legally acceptable, particularly in cases involving psychological conditions and proportionality assessments. Aims: This study aims to analyze the normative framework of grounds for criminal exemption and identify the principles guiding judicial evaluation. Results: The findings show that judges consistently apply the principles of proportionality, subsidiarity, and culpa in causa, while also assessing trial facts, the defendant’s mental state, and the balance between the threat faced and the defensive act. Novelty: This research highlights that judges also consider jurisprudence and customary law as extended bases for exemption beyond the Criminal Code. Implications: These findings underscore the need for consistent judicial guidelines to ensure that the application of grounds for criminal exemption remains aligned with the objectives of criminal law and the pursuit of substantive justice. Highlights: Judges apply proportionality, subsidiarity, and culpa in causa to assess criminal exemption. Trial facts and the defendant’s psychological condition strongly influence judicial decisions. Jurisprudence and customary law expand exemption grounds beyond the written Criminal Code. Keywords: Criminal Exemption, Judicial Principles, Proportionality, Indonesian Criminal Code, Substantive Justice  
Legal Protection of Semar Pouch (Nepenthes): Efforts to Increase Enviromental Conservation: Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Tumbuhan Kantong Semar (Nepenthes) : Upaya Meningkatkan Konservasi Lingkungan Hidup Budiani, Revalio Putra; Rosnawati, Emy
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 20 No. 4 (2025): November
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v20i4.1413

Abstract

General background: Indonesia holds rich biodiversity including carnivorous Nepenthes species that face threats from overexploitation and habitat loss. Specific background: Illegal collection and trade of Nepenthes have reduced wild populations and triggered legal responses at national and international levels. Knowledge gap: Existing literature emphasizes botanical and distributional studies but lacks focused legal analysis of protection mechanisms and enforcement outcomes. Aims: This study analyzes Indonesia’s legal framework and enforcement actions concerning Nepenthes to assess the adequacy of preventive and repressive protections. Results: Normative analysis of statutes, ministerial regulations, and documented enforcement cases reveals clear legal prohibitions and prescribed sanctions, yet enforcement variability and awareness gaps persist. Novelty: The paper synthesizes statutory provisions with recent case evidence to highlight implementation gaps in legal protection for Nepenthes. Implications: Findings suggest targeted policy improvements—strengthened monitoring, community engagement, and clearer species-specific guidance—to enhance conservation and legal compliance. Highlights: Statutory protections and ministerial listing for 59 Nepenthes species. Documented enforcement case linking illegal trade to cross-border buyers. Gap between legal provisions and practical enforcement outcomes. Keywords: Nepenthes, Legal Protection, Conservation Law, Illegal Trade, Indonesia

Page 62 of 62 | Total Record : 618

 58   59   60   61   62 

Filter by Year

2017 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February Vol. 20 No. 4 (2025): November Vol. 20 No. 3 (2025): August Vol. 20 No. 2 (2025): May Vol. 20 No. 1 (2025): February Vol. 19 No. 4 (2024): November Vol. 19 No. 3 (2024): August Vol. 19 No. 2 (2024): May Vol 19 No 2 (2024): May Vol. 19 No. 1 (2024): February Vol. 18 No. 4 (2023): November Vol. 18 No. 3 (2023): August Vol. 18 No. 2 (2023): May Vol 18 No 1 (2023): February Vol. 18 No. 1 (2023): February Vol. 17 (2022): November Vol 16 (2022): August Vol. 16 (2022): August Vol 15 (2022): May Vol. 15 (2022): May Vol 14 (2022): February Vol. 13 (2021): November Vol 13 (2021): November Vol 12 (2021): August Vol. 12 (2021): August Vol 11 (2021): May Vol 10 (2021): February Vol 9 (2020): November Vol 8 (2020): August Vol 7 (2020): May Vol 6 (2020): February Vol 2 No 2 (2019): February Vol 5 (2019): November Vol 4 (2019): August Vol 3 (2019): May Vol 2 No 1 (2018): November Vol. 1 No. 4 (2018): August Vol. 1 No. 3 (2018): May Vol 1 No 2 (2018): February Vol 1 No 1 (2017): November More Issue