cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
M Misbahul Mujib
Contact Email
misbahul.mujib@uin-suka.ac.id
Phone
+6281392409940
Journal Mail Official
supremasi.uinsuka@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Fakultas Syari'ah dan Hukum UIN Sunan Kalijaga; Jalan Marsda Adi Sucipto, Caturtunggal, Kabupaten Sleman, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55281
Location
Kab. sleman,
Daerah istimewa yogyakarta
INDONESIA
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum
Published by Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta
ISSN : 23021128     EISSN : 27234207     DOI : https://doi.org/10.14421/sh
Core Subject : Humanities, Social,
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
The focus and scope of SUPREMASI HUKUM: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum are legal Science, including the study of Law issues in Indonesia and around the world, either research study or conceptual ideas. Generally we are interested in all law studies such as following topics Civil Law, Criminal Law, Civil Procedural Law, Criminal Procedure Law, Commercial Law, Constitutional Law, International Law, State Administrative Law, Customary Law, Islamic Law, Agrarian Law, Environmental Law, Legal Theory and Legal Philosophy.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 217 Documents
 18   19   20   21   22 
From Regulation to Transparency: Policy Implementation of Public Information Disclosure in Indonesian State Religious Universities within the SDG 16 Framework Iswantoro; Tobroni, Faiq; Aktar, Md Nadim
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025): Supremasi Hukum
Publisher : UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14421/5ag4wd56

Abstract

Public information disclosure is a cornerstone of transparent, accountable, and participatory governance in higher education. This study examines the implementation of public information disclosure (PID) in State Religious Higher Education Institutions (PTKN) under Law No. 14/2008 and its derivative regulations. It aims to identify the gap between regulatory frameworks and institutional practices and to propose strategies for optimizing disclosure. The analysis employs Mazmanian’s policy implementation theory, focusing on three dimensions: problem characteristics, policy characteristics, and external environment. Data were drawn from the 2024 Monitoring and Evaluation (Monev) conducted by the Central Information Commission, complemented by a review of regulatory instruments and institutional practices in PTKN. The results indicate that most PTKN are still categorized as “less informative” or “non-informative.” Implementation barriers include limited administrative capacity, inadequate digital infrastructure, weak monitoring systems, and entrenched bureaucratic cultures. These factors collectively prevent PTKN from fully realizing the objectives of the Public Information Disclosure Law.The study proposes strategies to overcome these barriers, including enhancing the competence of Information and Documentation Management Officers (PPID), developing integrated digital platforms, strengthening leadership commitment, and institutionalizing rigorous monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. Collaboration with external stakeholders and improved public literacy on the right to information are also essential. Optimizing PID is not only a matter of legal compliance but also a governance tool and a moral responsibility aligned with religious values. Successful implementation will enhance public trust, institutional accountability, and the global relevance of Indonesia’s religious higher education sector while contributing to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16.
From Legal Formalism to Algorithmic Justice: Rethinking Consumer Protection in the Digital Economy Prihartanto, Yudi; Arifin, Firdaus; Maarif, Ihsanul; Kwarteng, Abdul Hamid
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025): Supremasi Hukum
Publisher : UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14421/gqmmwr98

Abstract

The rapid expansion of the digital economy has challenged traditional notions of consumer protection, which historically relied on reactive and positivist legal principles. Increasing data commodification, the pervasive role of algorithms, and structural power asymmetries expose the inadequacy of existing legal doctrines to safeguard fairness in digital transactions. This study seeks to address a critical research gap by reconceptualizing consumer protection law through the lens of algorithmic justice and participatory digital rights. Employing a normative legal methodology combined with comparative and critical approaches, the research analyzes doctrinal evolution across jurisdictions such as the European Union, Brazil, and Indonesia. The findings reveal three major shifts. First, consumer law must move beyond post-transaction liability toward proactive models of oversight, including algorithm audits and design-based compliance. Second, legal doctrines should redefine the consumer as a relational subject embedded in data-driven ecosystems, rather than a rational and autonomous actor. Third, consumer rights need to be embedded within constitutional and ethical frameworks to ensure long-term enforceability and democratic legitimacy. The study contributes theoretically by advancing an interdisciplinary paradigm of consumer law that integrates digital fairness, equity, and human dignity. Practically, it offers strategic directions for regulators and policymakers in designing responsive frameworks that anticipate risks, enhance accountability, and strengthen consumer agency in the digital era.
Evaluating Remedial Secession as a Legitimate Territorial Acquisition: Lessons from Eastern Ukraine 2022 Miano, Muhammad Ryan Ramadhani; Handayani, Irawati; Cristianti, Diajeng Wulan
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Vol. 13 No. 2 (2024): Supremasi Hukum
Publisher : UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14421/34gzhh23

Abstract

This study examines whether corrective secession can be considered a legitimate means of acquiring territory under contemporary international law, focusing on the secession referendum in Eastern Ukraine in 2022. Although the right to self-determination has evolved from a colonial context to broader applications, the legality of corrective secession in non-colonial situations remains controversial and under-explored. Previous research has largely focused on post-colonial cases such as Bangladesh and South Sudan, leaving a gap in understanding externally influenced secession movements. This article aims to address this gap through normative legal analysis, drawing on international legal instruments, state practice, and jurisprudence from the International Court of Justice and national courts. The findings of the study indicate that secession as a corrective measure can only be justified in exceptional cases where an ethnic group experiences ongoing and systematic discrimination, and where the parent state fails to provide an effective solution. When applied to Eastern Ukraine, this study finds no evidence of systematic human rights violations by the Ukrainian government that would justify secession. Instead, the conflict and referendum were largely triggered by external intervention, rendering such claims contrary to international law. This analysis reaffirms that the doctrine of secession as a remedy remains limited and exceptional, reinforcing the priority of territorial integrity in accordance with the UN Charter. This study contributes to the ongoing debate by clarifying the legal and moral thresholds for secession as a remedy, and provides a nuanced legal framework for assessing future claims of secession.
Reforming the Legal Framework of Notary Supervision in Indonesia: Towards a Digital Governance Model Dwi Suryahartati; Jefri Mahardika
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025): Supremasi Hukum
Publisher : UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14421/2xx8sn14

Abstract

The supervision of notaries in Indonesia remains conventional, mainly relying on manual, hierarchical, and fragmented mechanisms that hinder transparency, efficiency, and accountability. In contrast, many jurisdictions have restructured their professional oversight through digital governance systems to promote integrity and responsiveness in public services. Although Law No. 30 of 2004 and Law No. 2 of 2014 provide a normative foundation for notary supervision, Indonesia lacks operational mechanisms and digital integration consistent with global governance standards. Reforming this system has therefore become crucial to align national practices with international developments in digital legal oversight. This study employs a normative juridical method combined with conceptual and comparative approaches. Legal materials, including statutory provisions, academic journals, and institutional reports, were analyzed to identify structural and normative weaknesses. Comparative insights from the Netherlands, Germany, and the United States reveal that digital supervision enhances transparency, professional ethics, and institutional accountability. The findings show that Indonesia’s three-tier supervisory structure—MPD, MPW, and MPP—is legally established but technologically outdated. This research proposes a digital governance model for notary supervision integrating electronic supervision, real-time data reporting, and inter-institutional connectivity. Embedding responsive law principles, the model contributes to the global discourse on digital legal governance by providing a context-sensitive framework for modernizing professional oversight in developing legal systems.
Reconstructing Legal Accountability through Body-Worn Cameras: A Normative Study of Criminal Justice Reform in Indonesia Naidah, Siti; Fernando, Zico Junius
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025): Supremasi Hukum
Publisher : UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14421/3t9rqr77

Abstract

Efforts to modernize Indonesia's criminal justice system demand legal mechanisms that ensure accountability, fairness, and human rights protection at every procedural stage. While global studies on Body-Worn Cameras (BWCs) have focused on operational and policing impacts, few have examined their normative legitimacy and evidentiary validity within Indonesia's legal context. Anchored in the principles of the rule of law, due process, and evidentiary integrity, this study analyzes the legal status of BWCs, explores comparative practices in other jurisdictions, and formulates an ideal regulatory model for Indonesia. This research employs a normative legal method using conceptual and comparative approaches, analyzing statutory materials, public policies, and international practices from the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Australia. The findings reveal that Indonesia lacks a comprehensive legal framework governing operational standards, data management, and the evidentiary use of BWC recordings, resulting in uncertainty and fragmented practices. Comparative experiences show that BWCs become effective when legal systems ensure chain-of-custody integrity, privacy protection, and independent oversight. This study formulates a conceptual legal model integrating accountability, evidentiary reliability, and data protection through explicit activation rules, retention schedules, and dual accountability mechanisms involving internal and external oversight. Accordingly, BWCs are positioned not merely as technological devices but as instruments of legal reform that align Indonesia's criminal justice system with global standards of transparency, proportionality, and rights-based governance.
Judicial Inconsistency and the Rule of Law: A Critical Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision on Presidential Age Requirements in Indonesia Mukarromah, Naafiatul; Pangestu, Fachri Hamzah; Basuki, Udiyo; Hudallah, Muhammad Fahrul
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Vol. 13 No. 2 (2024): Supremasi Hukum
Publisher : UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14421/ad8p7x10

Abstract

The Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) of Indonesia plays a pivotal role as the guardian of the Constitution and the protector of constitutional rights. However, the Court’s ruling in Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 concerning the age requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates has sparked public controversy due to its inconsistency with previous judgments on identical legal provisions. This study critically examines the inconsistency of the Constitutional Court’s reasoning and evaluates the decision’s conformity with the principles of the rule of law and judicial independence. Using a normative juridical method supported by a statute and case approach, the research analyzes primary legal materials, including Constitutional Court decisions, relevant legislation, and judicial ethics regulations. The findings reveal that Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 deviates from the Court’s prior stance, effectively creating a new legal norm beyond its constitutional mandate, thus blurring the boundaries between judicial review and legislative authority. Furthermore, the proven ethical violations by the Chief Justice have weakened public trust in the integrity of constitutional adjudication. This article argues that such inconsistency undermines the predictability and legitimacy of the Court’s jurisprudence, which are essential to the rule of law. The study contributes to the broader discourse on judicial accountability by emphasizing the need for a coherent interpretive framework and stronger ethical oversight mechanisms to preserve the integrity of Indonesia’s constitutional justice system.
A Phenomenological Study of Theft Recidivism and Law Enforcement Strategies in Tulungagung, Indonesia Nurchasanah
Supremasi Hukum: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025): Supremasi Hukum
Publisher : UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14421/nnbz0462

Abstract

Theft recidivism remains a persistent global concern that reflects the complex interaction of socio-economic, psychological, and environmental factors shaping criminal behavior across diverse societies. Similar to global trends observed in the United States, Europe, and Japan, recidivism in Indonesia demonstrates how structural inequality, limited rehabilitation, and weak reintegration frameworks perpetuate repeated offending. Despite these parallels, Indonesian studies have primarily focused on normative legal analyses, offering limited insight into offenders' lived experiences and socio-structural dynamics. Addressing this gap, the present study explores the phenomenology of theft recidivism within the jurisdiction of the Tulungagung Police Department through a qualitative approach using deductive analysis. The findings reveal that economic strain, social disconnection, and institutional shortcomings jointly sustain reoffending behavior. Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory shows these factors interact across individual, interpersonal, institutional, community, and policy levels, forming an interdependent framework of recidivism. The Tulungagung Police have localized global best practices by integrating Social Control and Community Policing strategies—combining pre-emptive, preventive, restorative, and rehabilitative measures. Programs such as legal education, neighborhood patrols, restorative justice, and post-release empowerment reflect a shift from punitive deterrence to participatory crime prevention. Theoretically, this study contributes to global criminological discourse by contextualizing ecological and phenomenological insights; practically, it offers a localized, evidence-based model for sustainable desistance in Indonesia.

Page 22 of 22 | Total Record : 217

 18   19   20   21   22 

Filter by Year

2012 2025


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 13 No. 2 (2024): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 13 No. 1 (2024): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 12 No. 2 (2023): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 12 No. 1 (2023): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 11 No. 2 (2022): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 11 No. 1 (2022): Supremasi Hukum Vol 10, No 2 (2021): Supremasi Hukum Vol 10, No 1 (2021): Supremasi Hukum Vol 9, No 2 (2020): Supremasi Hukum Vol 9, No 1 (2020): Supremasi Hukum Vol 8, No 2 (2019): Supremasi Hukum Vol 8, No 1 (2019): Supremasi Hukum Vol 7, No 2 (2018): Supremasi Hukum Vol 7, No 1 (2018): Supremasi Hukum Vol 6, No 2 (2017): Supremasi Hukum Vol 5, No 2 (2016): Supremasi Hukum Vol 5, No 1 (2016): Supremasi Hukum Vol 4, No 2 (2015): Supremasi Hukum Vol 4, No 1 (2015): Supremasi Hukum Vol 3, No 2 (2014): Supremasi Hukum Vol 3, No 1 (2014): Supremasi Hukum Vol 2, No 2 (2013): Supremasi Hukum Vol 2, No 1 (2013): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 1 No. 2 (2012): Supremasi Hukum Vol 1, No 2 (2012): Supremasi Hukum Vol. 1 No. 1 (2012): Supremasi Hukum Vol 1, No 1 (2012): Supremasi Hukum More Issue