cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Abdul Kadir Jaelani
Contact Email
indonesiacontrariusinstitute@contrariusactus.com
Phone
+6287738904981
Journal Mail Official
jaelaniabdulkadir@staff.uns.ac.id
Editorial Address
Sibela Utara Street No.3, Mojosongo, Kec. Jebres, Kota Surakarta.
Location
Kota surakarta,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Contrarius
Published by Lembaga Contrarius Indonesia
ISSN : 30909309     EISSN : 31090931     DOI : https://doi.org/10.53955/contrarius.v1i3
Core Subject : Social,
Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Contrarius focuses on administrative law at global, national, regional, and local levels worldwide. The journal addresses specific issues on tax law, consumer protection law, environmental law, medical law, spatial law, labour law, agrarian law, transportation law, mining law, energy law, administrative, and legal justice. Contrarius publishes peer-reviewed while increasing the efficiency of the process. In addition, Contrarius also covers legal research in constitutional law with specific topics such as separation of powers and procedural due process, the structure and workings of the various agencies, procedural requirements for adjudication and rulemaking, enforcement discretion, methods of enforcement, government tort liability, freedom of information, and state finance. The journal warmly welcomes contributions from scholars with related disciplines. Novelty and recency of issues, however, are the priority in publishing.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol. 2 No. 2 (2026): Contrarius" : 5 Documents clear
Principle of Ecological Restorative Justice in Corporate Environmental Crimes Policies Absori, Absori; Arief Budiono; Maya Khater; Chetan Mukundan; Restu Mufanti
Contrarius Vol. 2 No. 2 (2026): Contrarius
Publisher : Lembaga Contrarius Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53955/contrarius.v2i2.271

Abstract

Environmental crimes pose a significant threat to ecological integrity and public welfare. However, law enforcement utilising retributive justice often fails to address the root causes of environmental damage caused by corporations. Therefore, alternative law enforcement efforts are necessary for more effective outcomes. This research aims to determine the effectiveness of current law enforcement against corporate environmental crimes in Indonesia, examine environmental crime enforcement in other countries, and identify an integrative environmental law enforcement policy model that incorporates the restorative justice approach in handling corporate environmental crimes. This study employs a normative legal research method with three approaches: statutory, conceptual, and comparative. This study finds that, first, law enforcement against corporate environmental crimes in Indonesia remains ineffective due to the difficulties in proving corporate liability, weak coordination and capacity among law enforcement agencies, and low levels of corporate compliance and transparency. Second, compared to Indonesia, Australia, specifically Victoria, has established a more comprehensive restorative justice framework through the Environment Protection Act 2017, whereas New South Wales still relies on judicial practice without an explicit restorative legal basis. Third, Indonesia needs to adopt an ecological restorative justice model that places environmental restoration, community participation, independent oversight, and stringent sanctions at the core of corporate criminal liability to truly realise ecological justice. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate law enforcement policies that incorporate ecological restorative justice principles, prioritising environmental restoration. Corporations should face sanctions and be required to restore damage in a tangible, measurable way, with independent oversight.
Bridging Formal Legality and Living Law Public Prosecutorial Policies to Achieve Justice Mashdurohatun, Anis; Wazna, Mahmoud W M Abu; Abdasmad, Mahmoud Elsayed Atyea; Joman Rabah Mahfouth Alkhatib
Contrarius Vol. 2 No. 2 (2026): Contrarius
Publisher : Lembaga Contrarius Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53955/contrarius.v2i2.272

Abstract

Recognition of living law: Article 2 of Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code marks a paradigm shift in Indonesian criminal law from the principle of formal legality to material legality. However, this change has not been accompanied by an update to criminal procedural law. In fact, Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) remains oriented towards legal positivism and does not provide a procedural mechanism to integrate existing social norms into criminal justice practices. This situation creates tension between legal pluralism, legal certainty, and demands for substantive justice in the criminal justice system. This study aims to analyse: (1) the position of the Criminal Procedure Code in accommodating living law in the criminal justice process; (2) the role of the Prosecutor's Office as dominus litis in integrating living law through prosecution policy; and (3) the reconstruction model of prosecution policy in the perspective of ius constituendum in order to realize the integration between formal legality and material legality. The study uses a normative legal research method with a statutory, conceptual, and comparative approach, and is analysed using the theory of justice, the Pancasila theory of justice, and Gustav Radbruch’s theory of legal values. The results of the study indicate that: (1) the Criminal Procedure Code functions as a procedural law based on formal legality so that it has not been able to operationalize the recognition of living law procedurally; (2) the Prosecutor's Office has in fact accommodated living law through prosecutorial discretion and restorative justice, but does not yet have systemic procedural legitimacy; and (3) reconstruction of prosecution policy is needed through a facilitation model by prosecutors, judicial verification, court decisions, and state execution in order to balance legal certainty, substantive justice, and social benefits in the Indonesian criminal justice system.
Does Regulatory Forfeiture of Fiduciary Assurance Undermine Justice? Prastyanti, Rina Arum; Hang, Nguyen Thi Thu; Ikhayere, Imiefoh Andrew
Contrarius Vol. 2 No. 2 (2026): Contrarius
Publisher : Lembaga Contrarius Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53955/contrarius.v2i2.273

Abstract

This study examines fiduciary security by emphasising the legal consequences arising from the seizure of fiduciary objects upon the rights of creditors and debtors, and by comparing fiduciary regulatory frameworks in Indonesia, Australia, and the United States. The research adopts a normative legal method utilising secondary data in the form of primary and secondary legal materials. The approaches employed include statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches to analyse the norms, principles, and practices governing fiduciary law across different jurisdictions. The research is descriptive and analytical, and it applies qualitative juridical analysis. The findings indicate that the seizure of fiduciary objects carries significant legal implications for both creditors and debtors, and that the implementation of Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Security has not fully safeguarded the interests of all parties. The international comparison reveals the necessity for clearer mechanisms for the enforcement of fiduciary security and the protection of creditors’ rights. Accordingly, a reconstruction of the normative framework within the Fiduciary Security Law is required to realise Rawlsian justice, through the strengthening of legal protection, the certainty of enforcement, and the equitable balance of rights between creditors and debtors.
Reframing State Loss Policy in Price-Related Corruption Cases: A Future Agenda Firmansyah, Amir; Mohammad Abdallah Alshawabke; Suzali Sulaiman; Jan Alizea Sybelle
Contrarius Vol. 2 No. 2 (2026): Contrarius
Publisher : Lembaga Contrarius Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53955/contrarius.v2i2.274

Abstract

State losses from corruption cases in Indonesia are commonly interpreted solely as financial losses, while broader economic losses are largely overlooked. Corruption generates impacts that extend beyond fiscal depletion, affecting economic stability, social welfare, ecological integrity, and other systemic dimensions. This study therefore aims, first, to identify and examine the challenges arising from the ambiguous definition of state loss in Indonesia’s legal framework, particularly in price-related corruption cases; second, to analyse Singapore’s conduct-based model of corruption enforcement, which does not treat state loss as an element of the offence; and third, to formulate an ideal normative framework that can strengthen Indonesia’s anti-corruption regime. Using a normative legal research method with statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches, this study finds that the ambiguity of the state-loss concept has made it difficult to establish economic losses in court, leading judges to focus exclusively on financial loss and leaving broader economic harm unaddressed in judicial decisions. In contrast, Singapore’s approach, by excluding state loss as an element of corruption, allows enforcement to centre on gratification and corrupt intent, resulting in a more coherent and efficient process than the Indonesian model. Consequently, a reframing of the state-loss concept is required, including more precise parameters of economic loss within anti-corruption law, standardised methodologies for its calculation, and broader asset-recovery mechanisms to enhance legal certainty and improve the overall effectiveness of corruption enforcement.
The Effect of Tax Transparency on the Effectiveness of Indonesia’s Mining Tax Policy Laksana, Andri Winjaya; Bambang Manumayoso; Arida Turymshayeva
Contrarius Vol. 2 No. 2 (2026): Contrarius
Publisher : Lembaga Contrarius Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53955/contrarius.v2i2.290

Abstract

The mining sector is a crucial pillar of the Indonesian economy and contributes significantly to state revenues. However, the effectiveness of mining tax policies continues to face various challenges, particularly low tax transparency, weak oversight, and tax avoidance through transfer pricing schemes, profit shifting, and inaccurate reporting. This research examines the current state of mining tax policies in Indonesia, determines the role of tax transparency in enhancing the effectiveness of these policies, and identifies the transparency reforms necessary to minimise tax avoidance in the mining sector. This study employs a normative juridical research method, utilising statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches. This study identifies three principal findings concerning the regulation and implementation of mining taxation in Indonesia. First, the Indonesian government has developed mining tax regulations to increase state revenue and strengthen oversight of mining activities. However, the existing regulatory framework still contains several structural weaknesses, particularly in the substance of legal norms, the effectiveness of supervisory institutions, and the institutional culture of transparency, which collectively create opportunities for tax avoidance practices. Second, the analysis demonstrates that tax transparency plays a crucial role in strengthening the effectiveness of mining tax governance. Comparative regulatory practices in several developed jurisdictions show that transparency mechanisms, including mandatory reporting obligations, standardized fiscal data systems, and public disclosure of financial information, significantly reduce opportunities for tax avoidance. Third, Indonesia can improve the effectiveness of its mining taxation regime by implementing transparency based regulatory reforms, including project level reporting, data standardization aligned with international initiatives, open data platforms, independent audits, and beneficial ownership disclosure to enhance accountability and sustainable natural resource governance.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2026 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 2 No. 3 (2026): Contrarius Vol. 2 No. 2 (2026): Contrarius Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026): Contrarius Vol. 1 No. 3 (2025): Contrarius Vol. 1 No. 2 (2025): Contrarius Vol. 1 No. 1 (2025): Contrarius