cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
-
Contact Email
islrev@mail.unnes.ac.id
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
islrev@mail.unnes.ac.id
Editorial Address
Sekaran, Kec. Gn. Pati, Kota Semarang, Jawa Tengah 50229
Location
Kota semarang,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Indonesian State Law Review (ISLRev)
Published by Universitas Negeri Semarang
ISSN : -     EISSN : 26548763     DOI : https://doi.org/10.15294/islrev
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Indonesian State Law Review (ISLRev) (Online ISSN: 2654-8763 and Print ISSN: 2654-3125) is a peer-reviewed journal for discourse on Indonesian administrative and constitutional law published biannually (April & October) since 2018 by the Universitas Negeri Semarang (UNNES), Indonesia and managed by Department of Administrative and Constitutional Law, Faculty of Law Universitas Negeri Semarang
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Pengambilan Keputusan (semua kategori) - Ilmu Pengambilan Keputusan (Lain-Lain)
Articles 82 Documents
 1   2   3   4   5 
Revolutionizing Indonesia’s Administrative Court: A Bold Push for Fairness and Proportionality Rahman, Nazla Arliva; Damayanti, Ratih; Rajib, Rayi Kharisma
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i1.18860

Abstract

Indonesia's administrative justice system is at a critical juncture, facing challenges of inefficiency, inconsistency, and limited access to fair legal recourse. This research examines the urgent need for a transformative approach in establishing an Indonesian Administrative Court grounded in the principles of fairness and proportionality. Despite progress in administrative reform, the current system often falls short of delivering just outcomes for citizens, leaving many marginalized and without proper redress. The novel contribution of this study lies in its comprehensive framework for integrating these foundational principles into the court’s design and practice. By analyzing both international best practices and local judicial traditions, the research proposes a set of reforms that would enhance the accessibility, transparency, and responsiveness of the administrative judiciary. The principle of fairness emphasizes equal treatment and impartial decision-making, while proportionality ensures that legal outcomes align with the scale of the issues at hand. Through an in-depth case study of administrative court decisions, this work identifies critical gaps where these principles can be meaningfully implemented. The urgency of these reforms is underscored by the growing demand for public accountability and citizen trust in the judiciary, which is essential for Indonesia’s democratic stability. By offering practical solutions and a conceptual shift, this research provides a timely contribution to the ongoing discourse on judicial reform in Indonesia, with the potential to reshape the administrative court system into a more equitable and effective institution for all citizens.
Is Public Information Openness the Key to Unlocking Justice in Indonesia’s State Administrative Court? Maharani, Desty Puspita; Herlambang, Pratama Herry; Arifin, Ridwan
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i1.18861

Abstract

The principle of public information openness is a cornerstone of democratic governance, yet its implementation within Indonesia’s State Administrative Court remains underexplored. This research addresses the urgent need to assess how transparency and public access to information can enhance justice in administrative litigation. In a time when citizen trust in the legal system is fragile, and the accessibility of court decisions is increasingly crucial, the study explores whether the openness of public information can serve as a catalyst for greater accountability and fairness in the administrative justice system. The novelty of this research lies in its critical examination of the relationship between information transparency and judicial effectiveness in the context of administrative courts. By analyzing existing practices and identifying gaps in public access to court processes, the study presents an innovative approach to improving the delivery of justice. Through qualitative case studies and a comparative analysis of international practices, the research proposes actionable recommendations for reform. This study contributes to ongoing discussions on judicial transparency and its impact on public perception, aiming to create a more open, inclusive, and accountable State Administrative Court. The findings suggest that public information openness is not merely a procedural formality, but a fundamental aspect of building trust in the judiciary and empowering citizens in their pursuit of justice.
Can Reforming Dismissal Procedures in State Administrative Courts Enhance Transparency and Accountability? Ashilsyah, Maulidhiyo Aprarel; Nuriyatman, Eko; Rodiyah, Rodiyah; Wedhatami, Bayangsari
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i1.18862

Abstract

The effectiveness of Indonesia’s State Administrative Courts is increasingly under scrutiny, particularly regarding the dismissal procedures that often lack transparency and accountability. This research explores the urgent need for reform in these procedures to foster greater public trust in the judicial system. In a country where citizens’ rights and access to justice are vital to democratic governance, the lack of clarity and fairness in dismissal decisions can undermine confidence in the court’s integrity. The novelty of this study lies in its focus on dismissal procedures as a critical yet often overlooked area of judicial reform. By examining current practices, legal frameworks, and case law, the research identifies key weaknesses in the system, proposing innovative reforms aimed at enhancing procedural transparency, consistency, and accountability. A comparative analysis with international best practices highlights practical solutions that could be adopted to improve the fairness and efficiency of dismissal processes. This research makes a significant contribution by offering a targeted framework for reform that prioritizes the protection of citizens’ rights, ensuring that judicial decisions, particularly dismissals, are made with clarity, fairness, and public scrutiny. It calls for systemic change to align administrative justice with democratic principles of openness and accountability.
Comparative Study of the Application of the 'Conseil d'État' Concept in State Administrative Courts in Indonesia Azam, Muhammad Adzkiya; Mamonto, Moch. Andry Wikra Wardhana; Hidayat, Arif; Yudhanti, Ristina
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i1.18863

Abstract

The State Administrative Court (PTUN) in Indonesia plays a crucial role in resolving disputes between individuals or legal entities and state administrative bodies or officials, serving as a protector of justice in the relationship between government and society. Similarly, France's Conseil d'État, established in 1799, serves as the highest administrative judicial body, resolving conflicts between citizens and the government, while also advising the government on legislative matters. This article presents a comparative study of the application of the Conseil d'État concept in the context of Indonesia’s State Administrative Courts. Using a normative juridical research method, the study examines whether the structures, functions, and practices of the Conseil d'État can be adapted to enhance the Indonesian legal system. The research explores key differences and similarities in the roles of these institutions, focusing on procedural, institutional, and advisory aspects. The findings suggest that while both institutions share a common goal of ensuring accountability and fairness in state administration, the application of the Conseil d'État model in Indonesia may face challenges due to differences in legal traditions, governance structures, and administrative practices. Nevertheless, adopting certain aspects of the Conseil d'État, such as its advisory role and specialized procedural mechanisms, could improve the efficiency and authority of the PTUN. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse on legal reforms in Indonesia’s administrative justice system, offering valuable insights into potential reforms that could enhance judicial independence and promote better governance. The study's novelty lies in its focus on cross-national legal comparisons, offering a fresh perspective on the adaptation of foreign legal models in Indonesia. Given the urgent need for judicial reform in Indonesia, the findings of this study could guide future policy changes aimed at strengthening administrative justice.
Rethinking Justice: The Urgent Need to Simplify Legal Appeals and Cassation for Faster Administrative Court Decisions Hakim, Putri Balqis Nuril; Rochman, Aulia; Alkadri, Riska; Maritah, Martitah
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i1.18865

Abstract

The efficiency of procedural examinations in Indonesia’s state administrative courts is essential for ensuring timely justice, especially in cases requiring urgent resolution. However, the current appeals and cassation processes often extend the overall timeline, undermining the court's ability to address urgent matters swiftly. While the initial procedural examination may be expedited, the subsequent appeal and cassation stages follow the same cumbersome steps as ordinary procedures, leading to significant delays—sometimes spanning several months. This prolonged timeline is particularly concerning when quick resolution is critical, as it can hinder the effective administration of justice. This study examines the necessity of simplifying the legal appeals and cassation processes to ensure faster and more efficient case resolutions in state administrative courts. Using a normative juridical research method, the paper assesses the inefficiencies of the current system, highlighting the urgent need for reform. It draws on Lawrence M. Friedman’s legal system theory to identify gaps within the existing framework that contribute to delays and proposes strategic interventions to streamline these processes. The findings suggest that, in addition to simplifying procedural measures, the integration of technology—such as an e-court system—could significantly expedite the appeal and cassation processes. By embracing digital solutions, administrative courts can reduce case backlogs and enhance efficiency, thus improving the overall responsiveness of the judicial system. This research contributes novel insights into how legal procedures can be reformed to better meet the demands of urgent cases. The study emphasizes the critical importance of judicial efficiency and technological innovation, offering actionable recommendations for policymakers to improve administrative justice in Indonesia.
Can the Erga Omnes Principle Revolutionize State Administrative Courts? A Challenge Through Lawrence M. Friedman’s Legal System Theory Mayaka, Raphael Bertrand; Sulistiyono, Tri; Gusthomi, Moh. Imam; Windiahsari, Windiahsari
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 2 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i2.18870

Abstract

The principle of erga omnes, which signifies obligations binding on all parties, has traditionally been associated with international law and human rights. However, its application within state administrative courts remains an underexplored and provocative area of legal theory. This study delves into whether the erga omnes principle can be adapted to revolutionize Indonesia’s State Administrative Court (PTUN) system, drawing on Lawrence M. Friedman’s Legal System Theory as a framework. Friedman’s theory, which emphasizes the interaction of legal rules, legal culture, and the legal environment, offers an insightful lens to analyze the broader implications of applying erga omnes in the domestic administrative context. The findings suggest that while the erga omnes principle could significantly strengthen the role of state administrative courts in ensuring broader societal justice, its implementation presents notable challenges. These challenges include the difficulty in aligning domestic legal systems with the universal and binding nature of erga omnes, the risk of overwhelming courts with cases that require systemic change, and the potential for conflicting interpretations of the principle's scope. Despite these challenges, the study proposes that strategically applying erga omnes could enhance legal coherence, public trust, and accountability in administrative decision-making. This research challenges conventional thinking by proposing an audacious application of international legal principles to domestic administrative law. It provides fresh insights into how judicial reform could reshape the PTUN system, urging policymakers and legal scholars to rethink the boundaries of state administrative justice in Indonesia.
Is the Separation of State Attorneys the Key to Legal Reform in State Administrative Courts? Sipahutar, Cornelius Samuel; Emha, Zidney Ilma Fazaada; Naelufar, Rizqan
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 2 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i2.18872

Abstract

The role of state attorneys in administrative justice has long been a topic of debate, particularly in the context of Indonesia’s State Administrative Court (PTUN). Currently, state attorneys serve as both legal representatives for the government and as the public prosecutor in administrative disputes. This dual function has raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest and inefficiencies in the judicial process. This research explores the concept of separating the roles of state attorneys in the PTUN as a potential bridge for legal reform, with the aim of improving impartiality, transparency, and efficiency in state administrative disputes. Using a normative juridical approach, the study examines the advantages and challenges of creating a clear distinction between the roles of government legal counsel and public prosecutors in administrative cases. The findings suggest that such a separation could reduce conflicts of interest, enhance fairness in the adjudication process, and promote a more balanced approach to administrative justice. However, the implementation of this reform faces practical challenges, such as institutional resistance and the need for legislative changes. The novelty of this research lies in its exploration of a structural reform within the Indonesian administrative justice system, offering a fresh perspective on improving the independence and credibility of state administrative courts. The urgency of this reform is emphasized by the growing need for a more transparent and efficient judicial system that can meet the demands of modern governance. This study contributes to the ongoing discourse on legal reform in Indonesia and provides recommendations for policymakers aiming to strengthen the administrative justice system.
Is Forced Money (Dwangsom) the Key to Enforcing Administrative Court Decisions? Examining Its Impact on Compliance Chandra, Felisha; Syahwal, Syahwal; Herlambang, Pratama Herry; Akbar, Muhammad
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 2 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i2.18874

Abstract

The implementation of forced money (dwangsom) in Indonesia’s administrative courts is a legal tool aimed at ensuring compliance with court decisions, particularly in cases where government bodies fail to fulfill their obligations. This research explores the effectiveness of the dwangsom policy and its implications for improving compliance with administrative court rulings. Using a normative juridical approach, the study analyzes how dwangsom is applied in practice and its impact on the level of compliance by state institutions. The findings reveal that while the dwangsom policy has the potential to encourage compliance, its practical application remains inconsistent. In many instances, government agencies either evade or delay the payment of forced money, leading to minimal impact on ensuring timely enforcement of decisions. The research highlights the need for stricter enforcement mechanisms and greater accountability for public officials who fail to comply with court orders. This study introduces a novel perspective on the role of dwangsom in the broader context of administrative justice in Indonesia. It also addresses the urgency of enhancing its effectiveness to improve the credibility of the administrative courts. The contribution of this research lies in its critical evaluation of the dwangsom policy and its potential for reform. By offering recommendations for strengthening enforcement and compliance, this research aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on improving the efficiency and accountability of Indonesia's administrative justice system. The findings are particularly relevant to policymakers, legal practitioners, and reform advocates working towards a more responsive legal system.
Can the State Administrative Court Shield Citizens from Government 'Tort'? A Path to Justice in Dispute Resolution Widianta, RM Ivansyah Gusti; Akbarsyah, Iqbal Salamuddin
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 2 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i2.18876

Abstract

In democratic governance, protecting citizens from wrongful acts by the government is crucial to maintaining public trust and ensuring justice. In Indonesia, the State Administrative Court (PTUN) serves as the primary forum for resolving disputes between individuals or legal entities and government authorities. However, when these disputes involve acts of "government tort"—illegal or wrongful actions by the state—citizens often face significant challenges in seeking redress. This research explores the role of the PTUN in protecting citizens against government torts, focusing on its capacity to provide timely and effective remedies. Using a normative juridical approach, this study analyzes the current legal framework and procedural mechanisms within the PTUN, highlighting the barriers citizens face when challenging government actions. The findings reveal that while the PTUN offers a critical platform for redress, its effectiveness is hindered by procedural complexities, limited legal remedies, and slow judicial processes. The research argues that reforms are urgently needed to enhance the PTUN’s role as a protector of citizens' rights in the face of government torts. This research introduces the novel concept of "government tort" within the context of Indonesia's administrative justice system, offering fresh insights into its application in legal practice. The urgency of reform lies in ensuring that citizens can effectively challenge government actions that harm their rights and freedoms. The study’s contribution is significant in providing recommendations for legal and procedural reforms aimed at strengthening the PTUN, ensuring that it can offer timely and accessible remedies for individuals harmed by government misconduct.
AI in Administrative Dispute Resolution: Exploring Opportunities and Risks Wibowo, Esa Maulana; Nte, Ngaboawaji Daniel; Kusuma, Bagus Hendradi
Indonesian State Law Review Vol. 7 No. 2 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/islrev.v7i2.18877

Abstract

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into the resolution of administrative disputes presents both significant opportunities and potential risks within the legal framework. As administrative courts globally face growing caseloads and demands for faster, more efficient decision-making, AI offers a promising solution for enhancing the speed, accuracy, and consistency of legal processes. This research explores the potential applications of AI in Indonesia's administrative justice system, focusing on its role in case management, decision support, and predictive analytics. The findings highlight several key opportunities, including AI’s potential to streamline case processing, reduce human error, and improve access to justice by automating routine tasks. Additionally, AI can help predict legal outcomes based on data-driven insights, offering both practitioners and courts valuable tools to enhance decision-making. However, the study also identifies significant risks, such as the potential for bias in algorithmic decision-making, lack of transparency, and concerns over the loss of human oversight in critical legal decisions. These risks may undermine the fairness and accountability of administrative dispute resolution. The novelty of this research lies in its focus on the intersection of AI and administrative law, offering a fresh perspective on how emerging technologies can be harnessed to improve judicial efficiency while addressing the inherent challenges. The urgency of this exploration is underscored by the increasing demand for reforms in administrative justice systems. This study contributes valuable insights for policymakers and legal professionals on how to balance innovation with safeguards to ensure AI’s responsible and equitable use in administrative dispute resolution.

Page 1 of 9 | Total Record : 82

 1   2   3   4   5 

Filter by Year

2018 2025


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 8 No. 1 (2025): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2025 Vol. 7 No. 2 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2024 Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2024 Vol. 6 No. 2 (2023): Indonesian State Law Review, 2023 Vol. 6 No. 1 (2023): Indonesian State Law Review, 2023 Vol. 5 No. 2 (2022): Indonesian State Law Review, 2022 Vol. 5 No. 1 (2022): Indonesian State Law Review, 2022 Vol. 4 No. 2 (2022): Indonesian State Law Review, 2022 Vol. 4 No. 1 (2021): Indonesian State Law Review, 2021 Vol. 3 No. 2 (2021): Indonesian State Law Review, 2021 Vol. 3 No. 1 (2020): Indonesian State Law Review, 2020 Vol. 2 No. 2 (2020): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2020 Vol. 2 No. 1 (2019): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2019 Vol. 1 No. 2 (2019): Indonesian State Law Review, April 2019 Vol. 1 No. 1 (2018): Indonesian State Law Review, October 2018 More Issue