cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Novianita Rulandari
Contact Email
journal@idscipub.com
Phone
+6285218596868
Journal Mail Official
journal@idscipub.com
Editorial Address
Gondangdia Lama Building 25, RP. Soeroso Street No.25, Jakarta, Indonesia, 10330
Location
Kota adm. jakarta pusat,
Dki jakarta
INDONESIA
Legalis : Journal of Law Review
Published by PT Penerbit Ilmiah Indonesia
ISSN : -     EISSN : 30308658     DOI : https://doi.org/10.61978/legalis
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Legalis : Journal of Law Review with ISSN Number 3030-8658 (Online) published by Indonesian Scientific Publication, published original scholarly papers across the whole spectrum of law. The journal attempts to assist in the understanding of the present and potential ability law review.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): October 2025" : 5 Documents clear
Legal Innovations and Barriers in Climate Change Litigation: A Global Narrative Review Hermansyah
Legalis : Journal of Law Review Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): October 2025
Publisher : Indonesian Scientific Publication

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61978/legalis.v3i4.794

Abstract

This narrative review explores the evolving landscape of climate change litigation and its intersection with environmental justice. The study aims to analyze legal innovations, structural barriers, and community participation in global climate litigation, with a particular focus on the integration of human rights frameworks. Literature was retrieved from Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, JSTOR, and HeinOnline using targeted keywords and Boolean combinations. Inclusion criteria focused on peer-reviewed studies and legal analyses discussing litigation, human rights, and environmental justice.Findings reveal a significant rise in legal innovations, including the judicial recognition of environmental rights and the application of intergenerational equity. Human rights-based litigation has influenced courts to mandate stronger climate action, especially in Europe and Latin America. However, substantial structural and institutional barriers remain, such as procedural limitations and weak institutional capacity, particularly in developing countries. Civic engagement and community-generated evidence emerged as key drivers in legitimizing claims and shaping litigation outcomes. Comparative analysis illustrates that while developed nations benefit from robust legal systems, emerging innovations in Africa and Latin America also contribute to transformative environmental governance. The study concludes that climate litigation serves as a critical tool for enforcing environmental accountability. It calls for systemic reforms to strengthen access to justice, integrate legal outcomes into policymaking, and expand participatory legal frameworks. Further research should assess the durability of legal precedents and the broader socio-political impacts of litigation.
Transitional Justice and Sustainable Peace: Comparative Insights and Policy Implications Hermansyah
Legalis : Journal of Law Review Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): October 2025
Publisher : Indonesian Scientific Publication

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61978/legalis.v3i4.796

Abstract

Transitional justice plays a pivotal role in restoring peace and accountability in societies emerging from conflict. This narrative review explores the mechanisms employed across various post-conflict settings, aiming to understand their effectiveness and contextual relevance. Using systematic literature search methods across databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, the review analyzed peer-reviewed articles, research reports, and gray literature published within the last decade. Boolean search strategies and specific inclusion criteria were applied to identify studies focused on formal legal structures, community-based practices, gendered experiences, economic reparations, environmental considerations, and cross-national comparisons. The findings reveal that while international tribunals contribute to legal precedent, their detachment from local realities often limits community impact. Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs) have helped articulate historical grievances, but their effectiveness depends heavily on political will and institutional support. Informal mechanisms rooted in local culture offer promising pathways for healing and legitimacy, especially when integrated with civil society participation. Gender-sensitive approaches enhance justice outcomes by addressing violence against women and ensuring female representation. Furthermore, economic and environmental justice are increasingly recognized as integral to sustainable post-conflict recovery. Comparative cases from Timor Leste, Guatemala, and Bosnia highlight the importance of local engagement and context-specific adaptation of global frameworks. This study emphasizes the urgency of systemic reforms, inclusive policy-making, and long-term investments in justice mechanisms. It advocates for further research to overcome methodological challenges and supports multi-level strategies that center on community empowerment and resilience.
Inclusive Positivism and the Courts: Reconciling Legality and Legitimacy in Contemporary Democracies Widaningsih
Legalis : Journal of Law Review Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): October 2025
Publisher : Indonesian Scientific Publication

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61978/legalis.v3i4.1119

Abstract

This article critically reassesses legal positivism in the context of contemporary constitutional adjudication. Legal positivism traditionally maintains a strict separation between legal validity and moral reasoning, but modern courts increasingly rely on moral and constitutional principles to justify legal outcomes. This study analyzes four landmark legal texts: Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU (UK), S v Makwanyane (South Africa), Neubauer v Germany, and the European Union’s AI Act. Through doctrinal and comparative methodology, the research explores how judicial reasoning in each case explicitly reflects or diverges from exclusive and inclusive positivist theory. While Miller and the AI Act affirm source-based legality, Makwanyane and Neubauer reveal the judiciary's turn toward principle-based legitimacy. The findings suggest that inclusive positivism, and in some cases interpretivism, better reflects how courts navigate complex rights issues. The article concludes by proposing a hybrid jurisprudential model that retains the structural benefits of legal positivism while incorporating codified moral principles, offering a balanced approach suited to modern constitutional democracies.
Legal Design and Cyber Resilience: A Comparative Study of Cybersecurity Frameworks for Critical Infrastructure in Five Jurisdictions Supangat, Ajis; Taufiqurokhman
Legalis : Journal of Law Review Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): October 2025
Publisher : Indonesian Scientific Publication

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61978/legalis.v3i4.1121

Abstract

Cyber threats targeting critical infrastructure, particularly Operational Technology (OT) and Industrial Control Systems (ICS), have escalated globally in both frequency and severity, prompting nations to implement legal frameworks mandating risk management and incident reporting. This study provides a comparative analysis of cybersecurity regulations across five jurisdictions: the European Union, United States, Australia, Singapore, and Indonesia. It aims to evaluate how legal design, reporting obligations, and institutional coordination influence cyber risk outcomes. Using panel data from 2020 to 2025, this research employs Difference-in-Differences and fixed effects models to assess the relationship between regulatory adoption and indicators such as OT ransomware activity and ICS threat block rates. Legal variables include the implementation status of NIS2, CIRCIA, SOCI/SLACIP, the Cybersecurity Act (SG), and Perpres 82/2022 (ID). Outcome data are drawn from Dragos and Kaspersky ICS-CERT reports. The results indicate that jurisdictions with rapid reporting mandates (12–24h), standardized frameworks (NIST CSF), and strong institutional oversight demonstrate improved cyber resilience. For example, ransomware trends decline in Australia and the EU post-regulation, while malicious block rates increase in Singapore and Indonesia. However, compliance burdens and fragmented oversight reduce regulatory efficacy, especially in less coordinated systems like the US. The study concludes that successful cybersecurity governance depends on the alignment of legal mandates, operational feasibility, and institutional capability. For developing countries like Indonesia, enhancing cross-sector CSIRT capacity, aligning with global standards, and streamlining regulatory requirements are critical for improving national cyber resilience.
Cross-Border Consumer Disputes in the Digital Marketplace: Rethinking Jurisdiction and Law in Global E-Commerce Governance Taufiqurokhman; Sara, Rineke; Suseno, Wahyu Hanggoro; Zakaria, Ricky Muhamad
Legalis : Journal of Law Review Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): October 2025
Publisher : Indonesian Scientific Publication

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61978/legalis.v3i4.1122

Abstract

Cross-border e-commerce has created unprecedented opportunities for global trade but also introduced complex legal challenges regarding jurisdiction and applicable law in consumer disputes. This article explores how legal systems particularly those of the European Union (EU), the United States (US), ASEAN, and Indonesia govern jurisdiction and applicable law in business-to-consumer (B2C) e-commerce transactions. Using a doctrinal and comparative legal method, the study analyzes key instruments such as the Brussels I Recast, Rome I and II Regulations, Hague Conventions of 2005 and 2019, and relevant national laws. Case law from the CJEU and US courts is used to illustrate doctrinal interpretations, with attention to the targeting test, forum-selection enforceability, and protection of consumer rights. Procedural tools such as the Hague Service and Evidence Conventions are also examined. Findings reveal that while the EU offers a harmonized, consumer-focused regime, enforcement across borders remains inconsistent. The Hague 2019 Convention presents a pathway toward enforceability but requires broader ratification. The US system emphasizes contractual freedom, often limiting consumer protections. Regional efforts, particularly in ASEAN and Indonesia, demonstrate varied progress in legal harmonization. Jurisdictional ambiguity, enforcement gaps, and fragmented legal standards continue to affect legal certainty in cross-border e-commerce. The article concludes that harmonized jurisdictional and applicable law standards, coupled with technological and institutional innovation, are necessary to ensure consumer protection and support legal predictability in global digital markets.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2025 2025


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): January 2026 Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025): October 2025 Vol. 3 No. 3 (2025): July 2025 Vol. 3 No. 2 (2025): April 2025 Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): January 2025 Vol. 2 No. 4 (2024): October 2024 Vol. 2 No. 3 (2024): July 2024 Vol. 2 No. 2 (2024): April 2024 Vol. 2 No. 1 (2024): January 2024 Vol. 1 No. 1 (2023): October 2023