cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Raden Alhempi
Contact Email
admin@penajournal.com
Phone
+6281233964593
Journal Mail Official
admin@penajournal.com
Editorial Address
Jl. Ketitiran No. 05 Kecamatan Sukajadi, Pekanbaru, Provinsi Riau, 28124
Location
Kota pekanbaru,
Riau
INDONESIA
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law
Published by Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara
ISSN : -     EISSN : 29623405     DOI : https://doi.org/10.56107/penalaw
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law publishes original research papers at the forefront of law. Topics that are published and emphasized in this journal include: International law, constitutional and administrative law, criminal law, contract law, tort law, property law, civil law, general and equality law, religious law, political law, legal history , Information Law, Labor Law, Criminology, etc.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 76 Documents
 4   5   6   7   8 
International Diplomacy Policy on the Iran–United States War (2025–2026) from the Perspective of Siyasah Harbiyah: International Diplomacy Policy on the Iran–United States War (2025–2026) from the Perspective of Siyasah Harbiyah Rojaya Marbun; Syaiful Amri
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.306

Abstract

This research is motivated by the escalation of geopolitical tensions between Iran and the United States during the 2025–2026 period. This conflict peaked with Iran's implementation of a maritime blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The closure of this global energy route significantly impacted the international economy, including threats of inflation and a surge in energy subsidies, particularly in Indonesia. This study aims to dissect the dynamics of Iran's foreign policy changes and multilateral diplomatic responses from a Siyasah (Islamic politics) perspective. Using a normative juridical method that is qualitative-descriptive with a case approach, data were collected through a literature review of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, such as the Qur'an, Hadith, classical fiqh literature, and relevant regulatory documents. The theory of Siyasah Dauliyah serves as the macro framework for international relations, while Siyasah Harbiyah functions as a specific analytical tool for armed crisis conditions. The results show that Iran's initial blockade of the Strait of Hormuz was a legitimate form of asymmetric defense (al-difa') when its state sovereignty was threatened. However, between April and May 2026, the Iranian government engaged in political ijtihad by gradually reopening access to the strait through envoy channels (al-sifarah) mediated by neutral countries such as Oman and Qatar. This de-escalation was triggered by multilateral diplomatic pressure from forums such as the OIC and the UN. The study concludes that the flexibility of Iran's policy, shifting from military confrontation to peaceful accommodation, is a clear manifestation of the enforcement of contemporary Siyasah Dauliyah and Siyasah Harbiyah strategies to achieve shared economic benefit (maslahah ammah) and prevent wider global harm.
LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE PRESIDENT IN A SOVEREIGN STATE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF SIYASAH DAULIYAH (A CASE STUDY OF THE ARREST OF THE PRESIDENT OF VENEZUELA): LEGAL PROTECTION OF THE PRESIDENT IN A SOVEREIGN STATE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF SIYASAH DAULIYAH (A CASE STUDY OF THE ARREST OF THE PRESIDENT OF VENEZUELA) Muhammad Rahmat Ridha; Afifa Rangkuti
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.307

Abstract

State sovereignty and head of state immunity are fundamental principles of international law, shielding heads of state from foreign court jurisdiction under the doctrine *par in parem non habet imperium*. This study examines the legal protection afforded to a president as head of state and reviews the U.S. arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro through the lenses of international law and Siyasah Dauliyah. Using a normative legal method with statutory and conceptual approaches, the research finds that Maduro’s arrest carried out via a unilateral military operation without UN Security Council authorization and without due international legal process violates Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and contravenes customary international law on head of state immunity. From the Siyasah Dauliyah perspective, the head of state embodies political authority and state sovereignty; thus, any action against him constitutes an action against the state itself. The principles of equality, justice, human dignity, and peace, which underpin international relations in *Siyasah Dauliyah*, reject intervention and the use of force against other states. Consequently, legal protection for a president as head of state is inseparable from safeguarding national sovereignty and upholding the non‑intervention principle in international affairs. Any breach of this protection not only undermines the rule of law but also threatens global stability and the mutual respect that sovereign states owe one another.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM OF PERPPU IN THE INDONESIAN LEGAL SYSTEM: TENSIONS BETWEEN EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF CHECKS AND BALANCES Indra Utama Tanjung; Arminsyah
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.308

Abstract

A Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPPU) is a constitutional instrument granted to the President under Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in cases of compelling emergency. Although normatively intended as an emergency mechanism, the practice of issuing PERPPUs has sparked debate regarding the limits of their constitutionality, particularly in the context of the relationship between the executive and legislative branches of government. This study aims to analyze the constitutionality of PERPPUs within the Indonesian legal system and examine the tensions between the President and the House of Representatives (DPR) from a checks and balances perspective. This study uses normative legal methods with a statutory and conceptual approach. The analysis was conducted on constitutional provisions, Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning the Formation of Legislation, and Constitutional Court Decision Number 138/PUU-VII/2009, which defines the objective parameters of compelling emergency. The results indicate that a PERPPU is formally valid if it meets the procedures stipulated in Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution and obtains DPR approval. However, substantively, the practice of interpreting the phrase "compelling urgency" still leaves room for subjectivity, potentially expanding executive authority in the legislative sphere. This asymmetry of power arises because the PERPPU is effective from its promulgation before the House of Representatives (DPR) approves it, thus ensuring ex post legislative control. This study proposes a reconstruction of the parameters of compelling urgency by emphasizing restrictive interpretations, objective proof of legal vacuum and time constraints, and strengthening substantive evaluation by the DPR. Thus, the constitutionality of the PERPPU can be maintained without sacrificing the principles of the rule of law and the balance of power within Indonesia's constitutional democratic system.
Balancing Privacy and Digital Security: A Transnational Approach to International Data Protection Law: Balancing Privacy and Digital Security: A Transnational Approach to International Data Protection Law Riko Nugraha; Yuhelson Yuhelson; Alan Robert White
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.312

Abstract

The growing tension between privacy rights and national security interests in the digital age points to a normative crisis in global data governance. While the European Union has adopted a rights-based approach such as the General Data Protection Regulation, many other jurisdictions have instead adopted sectoral or security-based models that widen international legal fragmentation. This article analyzes how transnational legal instruments—particularly Convention 108+, the APEC CBPR system, and OECD guidelines can serve as a normative bridge in reconciling these differing regimes. Using a comparative-normative legal research method, this study proposes the concept of “digital precautionary principles” as a new paradigm for balancing individual privacy with legitimate security needs. The research highlights the limitations of soft law in ensuring cross-border accountability and emphasizes the importance of a principle-based harmonization approach. Conceptually, this article expands the normative framework in transnational data protection law and practically provides policy guidance for developing countries in building fair and adaptive legal infrastructure for data protection. In the midst of increasingly intensive global interconnectedness, privacy protection that does not sacrifice collective security can only be achieved through anticipatory, interoperable, and rights-based global norms.
Overcriminalization in the Modern Criminal Justice System: A Threat to the Principles of Legality and Substantive Justice: Overcriminalization in the Modern Criminal Justice System: A Threat to the Principles of Legality and Substantive Justice Agus Kelana Putra; Kristiawanto Kristiawanto; Tubagus Achmad Doradjat
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.313

Abstract

Overcriminalization has become a systemic problem in modern legal systems, characterized by a tendency to use criminal law excessively to regulate various social behaviors. This study critically examines how the expansion of criminal law—both in scope and intensity—can threaten the principle of legality and undermine substantive justice. Using a normative qualitative approach, this study applies doctrinal and comparative legal analysis to three jurisdictions: Indonesia, the United States, and Germany. Primary sources include legislation and court decisions, while secondary data is obtained from academic literature and institutional reports. The findings reveal that overcriminalization often results in vague legal norms, disproportionate sanctions, and selective law enforcement—particularly affecting vulnerable groups. The study reveals that this trend has eroded legal certainty and turned criminal law into a political and moral tool. By integrating penal minimalism theory, justice theory, and legal positivism, this article offers normative parameters in the form of necessity, proportionality, and the principle of ultimum remedium to recalibrate the boundaries of legitimate criminalization. This research contributes to contemporary academic discourse by providing a structured analytical framework and concrete policy recommendations to strengthen the legitimacy and fairness of the modern criminal justice system.
Reparative Justice and State Responsibility: Reactualizing the Due Diligence Principle in Ensuring Civil Remedies for Human Rights Violations: Reparative Justice and State Responsibility: Reactualizing the Due Diligence Principle in Ensuring Civil Remedies for Human Rights Violations Simon S. Condro Kitono; Dedy Ardian Prasetyo; Supaphorn Akkapin
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.314

Abstract

The right to civil redress is a central pillar of reparative justice for victims of human rights violations. Although international legal instruments, such as the United Nations Basic Principles on the Right to Remedies and Reparation, affirm states’ obligation to guarantee this right, many have failed to establish mechanisms that are effective and accessible to victims. This article conceptualizes the principle of due diligence as a binding international legal standard that obliges states to prevent and respond to human rights violations and ensure the availability of accessible and enforceable civil restitution. Employing a normative legal method and a comparative case study of Argentina, Germany, and Indonesia, the analysis demonstrates that civil restitution remains the most fragile dimension of state accountability frameworks, with reparations frequently regarded as discretionary policies rather than legal mandates. To address this gap, this study advances a set of normative indicators for assessing states’ compliance with their reparation obligations. The findings highlight the imperative of embedding the principle of due diligence within national legal systems as a concrete legal obligation, thereby advancing victim-centered justice.

Page 8 of 8 | Total Record : 76

 4   5   6   7   8 

Filter by Year

2022 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): January Vol. 3 No. 2 (2025): September Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): May Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): JANUARY Vol. 2 No. 2 (2024): September Vol. 2 No. 1 (2024): May Vol. 1 No. 3 (2023): January Vol. 1 No. 2 (2022): SEPTEMBER Vol. 1 No. 1 (2022): MAY