cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
-
Contact Email
lesrev@mail.unnes.ac.id
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
lesrev@mail.unnes.ac.id
Editorial Address
Sekaran, Kec. Gn. Pati, Kota Semarang, Jawa Tengah 50229
Location
Kota semarang,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Lex Scientia Law Review
Published by Universitas Negeri Semarang
ISSN : -     EISSN : 25989685     DOI : https://doi.org/10.15294/lslr
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Lex Scientia Law Review [P-ISSN 2598-9677 | E-ISSN 2598-9685] is one of the prominent journals in Indonesia under the auspices of the Faculty of Law at Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia, has established itself as a preeminent platform for legal scholarship.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Pengambilan Keputusan (semua kategori) - Ilmu Pengambilan Keputusan (Lain-Lain)
Articles 83 Documents
 5   6   7   8   9 
Reconstruction of the Legal Framework for Consumer Protection in ESG-Based Digital Investment and Blockchain Technology: A Legal Study Muchammad Shidqon Prabowo; Dewi Sulistianingsih; Nasarudin Abdul Rahman; Takwim Azami
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.29090

Abstract

This study analyzes the regulatory framework for consumer protection in digital investment based on ESG principles and blockchain technology in Indonesia. The method used is juridical-normative with a statutory, conceptual, and comparative approach. The results of the study indicate a significant regulatory gap, including the non-recognition of the legality of smart contracts, the absence of a digital ESG claim verification mechanism, the absence of a blockchain-based dispute resolution model, and the fragmentation of supervision coordination between national authorities. As a contribution, this study offers a new legal framework model that integrates the recognition of smart contracts, the establishment of a digital ESG verification institution, the development of blockchain-based ADR, and regulatory harmonization. This innovation is expected to strengthen consumer protection in the sustainable investment ecosystem based on blockchain technology. In practice, this study recommends the formulation of the Digital and ESG Consumer Protection Law, the establishment of an independent ESG verification institution, and strengthening regulatory coordination in Indonesia. The novelty of this article is its focus on three areas of analysis: ESG, blockchain, and consumer protection. All three are analyzed from a legal perspective. The limitation of this study is the absence of empirical data; future research is recommended to use a quantitative or mix-method approach to evaluate consumer behavior in the ESG blockchain platform.
Sharenting and Child Privacy: The GDPR as a Benchmark for Indonesian and Thai Legal Frameworks Ampuan Situmeang; Abdurrakhman Alhakim; Ruetaitip Chansrakaeo; Winda Fitri; Winsherly Tan
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.29211

Abstract

The increasing trend of sharenting, which refers to parents sharing respective children's data on social media, has been observed to pose significant legal challenges regarding child privacy rights in Indonesia and Thailand. Therefore, this research aims to investigate the adequacy of Personal Data Protection frameworks in both Indonesia and Thailand, particularly in the face of associated risks of sharenting to data privacy amid rising digital exposures. The objective of the investigation is to evaluate the adequacy of Indonesia’s Personal Data Protection Law and Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) in safeguarding privacy of children within the digital sphere, using the European Union’s GDPR as a benchmark for best practices. Adopting a normative legal research method, this exploration systematically analyses primary and secondary legal sources to identify normative gaps and implementation challenges. The obtained results showed that both Indonesia and Thailand lack comprehensive legal safeguards that were explicitly designed to protect children’s digital privacy, with limitations in areas such as age thresholds for consent, the right to be forgotten, restrictions on profiling, and clear enforcement mechanisms. These normative deficiencies might position the relevant frameworks in an inadequate position to protect privacy rights of children in the increasingly digitalized world, where digital information can have a wide range of impacts on the present and the future development of the demographic. Compared to the GDPR, which provides explicit, robust child-specific protections, frameworks used by both observed countries remain insufficient in addressing the risks of sharenting. Accordingly, this research concludes that in order to effectively protect children’s privacy rights in the digital age, Indonesia and Thailand must reform respective legal frameworks to correspond with international privacy standards, to ensure that children's rights and digital autonomy are safeguarded amid growing parental social media disclosures and digital risks.
Corporate Secrets and the Ambiguity of Article 23: A Critical Analysis of KPPU’s Interpretation Anna Maria Tri Anggraini; Ahmad Sabirin; Verandha Mayva; Jimi Rambo R. Arranchado
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.29373

Abstract

This paper examines the application of the company secret concepts in KPPU decisions number 19/KPPU-L/2007, number 35/KPPU-I/2010, and Number 8/KPPU-L/2024, and how KPPU determines the corporate secrets. This paper employs a normative approach utilising secondary data supported by primary data from interviews with KPPU. The interesting findings indicate that the guidelines of Article 23 of Law Number 5 of 1999 remain unratified in regulations, often leading to company secrets and their criteria being equated with trade secrets as regulated in Law Number 30 of 2000 on Trade Secrets. Then, the objects of corporate secrets differ in the three decisions; the three discuss corporate secrets that must be kept confidential due to their economic value, potentially causing company losses if made public. The paper recommended that the amendments to Law No. 5 of 1999 should include a distinct definition of “company secrets” aligned with global business developments and international best practices. Furthermore, KPPU should adopt a structured rule-of-reason analysis in assessing Article 23 violations by considering the economic impact of information leakage, the perpetrator’s intent, and proportionality to competitive harm to ensure predictability and prevent abuse of authority.
The Legality of the Living Law in the New Indonesian Penal Code Ferry Fathurokhman; Anna Erliyana; Ali Masyhar; Mutiara Dwi Sari; Iren Sudarya
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.29908

Abstract

Since the Netherland introduced a Penal Code, The Indonesian people are required to rely on the principle of legality as the primary source of law in determining criminal offences. The old penal code does not allow living law to function as an independent source of law. On January 2nd, 2023, the new Indonesian Penal Code was finally established, which will enter into force within three years after its issuance. The provision of living law in the new Indonesian penal code is formulated in article 2. In its first verse, it is written that “provisions, as referred to Article 1 (legality principle), does not negate the validity of the law that live in a society which stipulates that someone deserves to be punished even though the act is not regulated in this Law." In the explanation section, it is stated that “law that lives in society” (living law) refers to Adat Law, which should be codified through Regional Regulations (Peraturan Daerah). This raises two issues: first, it confines the concept of living law solely to Adat Law; second, it requires Adat Law to be formalized in the form of regional legislation. If Adat Law must be regulated through Regional Regulations, the necessity of Article 2 becomes questionable. The purpose of recognizing living law is to address gaps in legal principles that cannot always keep pace with a rapidly changing society.
Comparison of Online Dispute Resolution for Business Disputes in Indonesia and The United States Opniel Harsana B Pongkapadang; Winner Sitorus; Hasbir Paserangi Paserangi; Nabeel Mahdi Althabhawi; Aneesh V. Pillai
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.29994

Abstract

This article examines the regulatory comparison and legal framework of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) in Indonesia and the United States, highlighting key differences in regulatory integration, technological infrastructure, and institutional synergy. The main problem identified is the fragmentation of ODR regulations in Indonesia, which lacks a comprehensive legal framework and faces significant challenges in ensuring legal certainty, effective enforcement, and public trust, especially among micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises. This study aims to analyze the weaknesses and strengths of ODR systems in both countries and formulate strategic recommendations for developing a credible and adaptive ODR ecosystem in Indonesia. Employing a normative legal research method with a statute and analytical comparative approach, the study explores the regulatory basis, implementation models, and best practices from both jurisdictions. The findings show that the United States has successfully developed an integrated legal structure for ODR, supported by federal acts, technological innovations, and multi-stakeholder collaboration, which ensures enforcement and data protection. In contrast, Indonesia's ODR implementation is still hindered by sectoral regulations, limited digital literacy, and the absence of standard accreditation for online mediators and arbitrators. The analysis concludes that Indonesia urgently needs an integrated ODR law that includes clear definitions, standard operating procedures, accreditation requirements, and mechanisms for the recognition and enforcement of ODR decisions in the national judiciary. By adopting best practices from the United States, particularly regarding cross-sector integration, technological adaptation, and decision enforceability, Indonesia can strengthen its ODR framework to support fair, efficient, and reliable business dispute resolution in the digital era.
Human Rights Protection Related to Arrest, Detention, and Judicial Remedies: A Comparative Legal Study of Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt Sahat Maruli Tua Situmeang; Athari Farhani; Subagyo Sri Utomo
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.30553

Abstract

Arrest, detention, and pretrial legal remedies constitute crucial stages in criminal procedure because they determine the extent to which state coercive power is constrained by due process and human rights guarantees. This study aims to examine and compare the legal regulation and practical implementation of arrest, detention, and pretrial review mechanisms in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, with particular attention to their compliance with human rights standards. Methodologically, this research employs normative legal research using a doctrinal and institutional comparative approach, analyzing statutory provisions, procedural regulations, constitutional safeguards, and relevant reports and legal materials. The findings show that Indonesia provides relatively stronger procedural safeguards through the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) and the praperadilan mechanism, which functions as judicial control over unlawful arrest and detention. Egypt formally recognizes legal oversight through the public prosecution and judicial review, yet persistent implementation gaps raise concerns regarding prolonged pretrial detention and limited procedural transparency. In contrast, Saudi Arabia demonstrates weaker independent judicial supervision at the pretrial stage, increasing the risk of arbitrary detention and executive overreach. This comparative analysis concludes that strengthening effective judicial review, access to legal counsel, and procedural accountability is essential to prevent abuses of power. The study recommends reinforcing institutional checks on detention practices to ensure greater alignment with international human rights principles and due process requirements.
The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Enhancing the Cyber Notary Concept in the Digital Era: Opportunities, Challenges, and Implications Dio Ahmad Hafidzan; Isis Ikhwansyah; Nanda Anisa Lubis; Yassine Chami
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.30905

Abstract

The rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping the landscape of legal services, with particular consequences for the practice of notarization. The concept of the Cyber Notary, a digital notarial service enabling remote and secure authentication of legal documents, has emerged as a critical institutional innovation in response to growing demand for efficient digital legal infrastructure. Yet, despite its transformative potential, the integration of AI into Cyber Notary systems continues to generate unresolved tensions between technological capability and legal permissibility. This study examines the role of AI in strengthening the Cyber Notary concept in the digital era, with particular emphasis on Indonesia's normative framework. Through a normative legal research methodology combining statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches, this paper identifies a fundamental conflict between the physical-presence requirements embedded in Law Number 2 of 2014 on Notarial Positions (UUJN) and the digitalization imperatives recognized under the ITE Law and Law Number 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection (PDPL). Drawing on comparative insights from Japan, the European Union, and the United States, the study demonstrates that the adoption of AI in notarial practice is legally feasible only where supportive regulatory infrastructure exists, a condition that Indonesia has not yet fully met. The findings underscore the necessity of targeted legislative reform, enhanced algorithmic transparency, and formal professional guidance to bridge the current regulatory vacuum. This research contributes to the broader discourse on the responsible integration of AI in civil law jurisdictions, offering concrete recommendations for policymakers, legal practitioners, and technology developers.
Autonomous Decision-Making and Agentic AI: Challenges and Prospects for Cyber Law Sayid Muhammad Rifki Noval; Irma Rachmawati; Ahmad Jamaludin; Deden Sumantry; Mohd Zakhiri Md Nor
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.32845

Abstract

Artificial intelligence's (AI) explosive growth, particularly in the form of Automated Decision Making (ADM) and Agentic AI, has brought significant changes across various sectors of life, while simultaneously posing complex legal and ethical challenges. This paper evaluates AI regulation and governance from the viewpoint on protection of consumers and cyber legislation, with an emphasis on Indonesia, which is striving to integrate this technology into the legal system and public policy. The findings reveal that Indonesia’s current AI-related regulations remain fragmented and insufficient to handle the regulatory dangers that progressively autonomous AI systems bring. This study examines several cases that illustrate the negative impacts of AI, such as algorithmic errors in the credit system in Germany that resulted in injustices for many individuals, as well as the social assistance distribution scandal in the Netherlands that had serious social and political implications. Concurrently, AI Act was adopted by the European Union as a significant regulatory advance that introduced a risk-based framework to increase accountability, transparency and human oversight in AI governance. Additionally, the controversy surrounding moral problems use AI in the US judiciary related to mass surveillance were also critically analyzed. Analysis of the existing regulations, including the Data Protection Law, the Digital Information and Transactions Law, and the Indonesian government's ethical policies, identifies deficiencies that need to be addressed through adaptive and holistic regulations. The concept of computational accountability and the adoption of international regulations as the Product Liability Directive (PLD) and the AI Liability Directive (AILD) are proposed through a normative juridical analysis, as mechanisms to strengthen accountability and legal protection. This paper also highlights the significance of clarification, openness, and awareness of new rights in the setting of increasingly autonomous and adaptive AI. 
Shaping Community-Based Rehabilitation: Policy and Practice in Philippine Parole and Probation Abelardo Morrok; Mark Patalinghug
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.36176

Abstract

Community-Based Rehabilitation (CBR) is increasingly positioned as a cornerstone of restorative and community-oriented corrections, yet its implementation is often assessed through offender outcomes rather than through the frontline officers who translate policy into practice. In the Philippines, empirical knowledge remains limited on how Probation and Parole Officers (PPOs) experience, negotiate, and sustain CBR work amid institutional constraints. Addressing this gap, this qualitative case study examined the lived experiences, implementation challenges, and coping mechanisms of PPOs in Region IX, Zamboanga Peninsula. Data were generated from ten experienced PPOs through in-depth interviews and focus group discussion and analyzed thematically. Findings reveal that PPOs construct CBR as both a rehabilitative duty and a moral vocation, deriving professional meaning from client transformation and successful reintegration. However, their practice is constrained by heavy caseloads, inadequate operational resources, long-distance field assignments, organizational tensions, shifting policies, and recurring ethical dilemmas. Despite these pressures, PPOs manage their work by continually re-prioritizing, managing emotion, learning, coping, and public service. The unique contribution of this study is conceptualizing CBR implementation as a human-institutional practice – rather than as a policy or client-driven practice – that is affected by the well-being, discretion, and coping capacity of officers. The study's theoretical contribution is to restorative justice and community corrections scholarship by revealing that rehabilitative results depend not only on laws and client obedience, but also on officers' emotional labor and on formal institutions' support mechanisms. The results provide directions for evidence-based improvement of support mechanisms for officers, resource distribution, and the sustainability of CBR implementation in the Philippines, and in similar correction systems.
Normative Differences Between the 2020 Supreme Court’s Landmark Decision and SEMA Number 3 of 2018 Regarding Polygamy Isbat Hartini Hartini; Faiz Rahman; Dita Elvia Kusuma Putri; Ahmad Bunyan Wahib; Yulkarnain Harahab
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v10i1.39720

Abstract

This study aims to (a) analyse the position of Landmark Decision in the current Indonesian legal system, (b) examine and analyse the contradiction between SEMA Number 3 of 2018 and 2020 Landmark Decision or religious civil law decision Number 223K/Ag/2020, and (c) explore ideal solutions for the case of validating unregistered polygamous marriages when there are different legal principles between SEMA Number 3 of 2018 and 2020 Landmark Decision. This research is normative legal research using secondary data obtained through a literature study as well as statute approach, case approach, and conceptual approach. The results show that (a) theoretically, landmark decisions are stronger than jurisprudence because they have significant values that change the textual meaning of positive law and contain legal rules that will have implications for the development of law in Indonesia compared to the power of jurisprudence.  (b) The contradiction between SEMA Number 03 of 2018 and the 2020 Landmark Decision occurs because SEMA establishes legal norms that completely isolate efforts to validate unregistered marriages due to polygamy by targeting the core procedural law related to formal procedural requirements, with the term “not admissible” or niet ontvankelijke verklaard, while the cases brought to the court are certainly causal in nature and cannot be generalized. (c) The settlement of the cases of marriage validation due to unofficial polygamy is by adhering to SEMA Number 03 of 2018 through discretion while referring to the 2020 Landmark Decision with some strict conditions.

Page 8 of 9 | Total Record : 83

 5   6   7   8   9 

Filter by Year

2024 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Legal Reform, Human Rights Protection, and Judicial Innovation in Contemporary Vol. 9 No. 2 (2025): November, 2025: Law, Policy, and Governance in Contemporary Socio-Economic Tran Vol. 9 No. 1 (2025): May, 2025: Law, Technology, and Globalization: Challenges and Innovations in th Vol. 8 No. 2 (2024): Advancing Justice, Rights, and Governance in a Digital and Decentralized World Vol. 8 No. 1 (2024): Contemporary Legal Challenges and Solutions in a Global Context