cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Ida Bagus Wyasa Putra
Contact Email
kerthapatrika@unud.ac.id
Phone
+6285936123767
Journal Mail Official
kerthapatrika@unud.ac.id
Editorial Address
Jl. Pulau Bali No. 1 Denpasar, Bali-Indonesia
Location
Kota denpasar,
Bali
INDONESIA
Kertha Patrika
Published by Universitas Udayana
ISSN : 0215899X     EISSN : 25799487     DOI : https://doi.org/10.24843/KP
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
The Kertha Patrika Journal (KP) is a scientific law journal published by the Faculty of Law, Udayana University, Bali. It is imperative to note that articles which do not align with the Author Guidelines stipulated by Kertha Patrika Journal will be summarily rejected. All articles submitted by authors and published in this journal initially undergo a double-blind peer review process. The purpose of this journal is to provide a platform for the publication of critical thinking based on original research, including conceptual ideas and review articles from academics, researchers, and practitioners that have not been published in other media. The scope and focus of articles published in this journal encompasses the following subjects: Constitutional Law; Administrative Law; Criminal Law; Civil Law; International Law; Procedural Law; Customary Law; Business Law; Tourism Law; Environmental Law; Law and Society; Information Technology and Electronic Transactions Law; Human Rights Law; and Contemporary Law.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 28 Documents
 1   2   3 
Evaluating the Implementation of Meaningful Participation Principles for Vulnerable Groups in Promoting Inclusive Legislation: A Comparative Study of Indonesia and Poland Rengga Kusuma Putra; Satriya Nugraha; Edvardas Juchnevicius; Willy Naresta Hanum; Sandra Leoni Prakasa Yakub
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 1 (2026): Recalibrate Indonesia Law based on Legal Reform in Specific Sectors
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i01.p02

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the regulation and implementation of the principle of meaningful participation of vulnerable groups in the legislative process, and to identify factors influencing its effectiveness in realizing inclusive legislation through a comparative study between Indonesia and Poland. This study uses a normative legal research method with a legislative, conceptual, and comparative approach. The legal sources include primary legal materials in the form of constitutions, laws, and regulations related to public participation and legislation; secondary legal materials in the form of national and international scientific journals, textbooks, and reports from state and international institutions; and tertiary legal materials as conceptual support. The analysis was conducted qualitatively through legal reasoning and a comparison between norms and practices in Indonesia and Poland. The results show that normatively both countries have recognized the importance of public participation, including vulnerable groups, as part of the principles of democracy and the rule of law. However, the implementation of meaningful participation still faces gaps between regulation and practice, particularly regarding access to information, substantive involvement, and the actual influence of vulnerable groups on the substance of legislation. Factors determining the effectiveness of meaningful participation include the strength of the legal basis, the political commitment of lawmakers, institutional capacity, the role of civil society, and transparency and accountability mechanisms. This research makes a scientific contribution by enriching comparative law-based inclusive legislative studies and offering policy recommendations for strengthening meaningful participation of vulnerable groups.
Discourse on State Capture and Legislative Corruption in the Formation of the National Capital City Law Sagung Mirah Pradnya Putri; Rubén Martínez Dalmau
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 1 (2026): Recalibrate Indonesia Law based on Legal Reform in Specific Sectors
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i01.p05

Abstract

This study examines state capture as a form of legislative corruption in the enactment of Law Number 3 of 2022 concerning the National Capital. Both procedural and substantive aspects of the IKN Law are evaluated against established principles of legislative formation, Constitutional Court jurisprudence, and the foundations of popular governance under the rule of law. Employing a socio-legal approach, the research integrates normative juridical analysis with qualitative empirical methods. The methodology includes analysis of legislation, Constitutional Court decisions, legislative documents, and reports from monitoring institutions, as well as document analysis and interviews with academics and civil society activists to gather empirical insights. The findings indicate that the IKN Law was expedited, providing minimal opportunity for meaningful public participation. This process contravened the transparency and participation principles outlined in the Law on the Formation of Legislation and reaffirmed in Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. Furthermore, the law grants the IKN Authority extensive powers without instituting sufficient checks and balances. The evidence demonstrates state capture, in which legislation is used to legitimize particular interests and undermine democratic oversight. These developments present significant threats to the rule of law, government accountability, and the principle of popular sovereignty within Indonesia's constitutional framework. 
State Financial Losses in Corruption Crimes: A Comparative Study of Indonesian and Dutch Criminal Law Jhon Kevin Christian Meliala; Mardian Putra Frans; David Susanto Sandy Illu
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 2 (2026): Contemporary Challenges in Law: Comparative Perspectives on Justice, Legal Pro
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i02.p01

Abstract

This article examines the issue of interpreting the element of “financial loss to the state or the national economy” in Article 2(1) of Law No. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Offenses. The research question is: to what extent can the lack of utility of goods purchased using the State Budget (APBN) be classified as an act that harms the national economy or state finances in the context of corruption? This study employs a normative legal method using a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, and a comparative approach. Primary legal materials, consisting of laws and Constitutional Court decisions, were analyzed using grammatical, systematic, and teleological interpretation methods. The research findings indicate that: (1) the element of state financial loss in Article 2(1) of the Anti-Corruption Law constitutes a formal offense that must still be proven objectively and measurably; (2) the lack of utility of goods procured through the State Budget ( ) does not automatically satisfy the element of state financial loss or harm to the national economy unless there is an unlawful act resulting in a tangible reduction of state assets; (3) the Dutch legal system, which applies an evidence-based approach, provides an alternative framework that can strengthen legal certainty in the interpretation of the element of state loss. The contribution of this article is to offer an analytical comparative perspective to reconstruct the interpretation of state loss more precisely in.
Expert Reposition in Criminal Case Investigation: A Comparison with the French Criminal Procedure Law I Nengah Nuarta; Mariko Hattori
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 2 (2026): Contemporary Challenges in Law: Comparative Perspectives on Justice, Legal Pro
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i02.p07

Abstract

Criminal procedural law is a crucial component of the criminal law system, governing the procedures for enforcing criminal acts, from the investigation, inquiry, prosecution, and trial to the trial itself. Expert testimony plays a crucial role in proving criminal cases. Expert testimony is necessary to provide explanations on matters requiring specialized knowledge or expertise that cannot be directly understood by the judge or the parties in the trial. The 2025 Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) recognizes expert testimony as a form of evidence in criminal proceedings, but does not clearly define the expert's status in the trial process. This research is a normative legal research. It uses a statutory approach, a legal concept approach, and a comparative approach to examine the positive norms governing expert examination in criminal trials. The analysis stage of normative legal research is conducted through a review of collected primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. This effort to reform criminal procedural law was then realized through the establishment of the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code, which replaced the previous 1981 Criminal Procedure Code. The 2025 Criminal Procedure Code aims to adapt the criminal justice system to developments in information technology and the need for a more modern evidentiary system. In the French legal system, experts are known as expert judiciaires, appointed by judges to provide technical analysis of the facts related to criminal cases. Furthermore, Article 157 of the Code de procedure pénale stipulates that experts appointed by judges must be drawn from the official list of experts registered with the court. Compared to the French legal system, this repositioning still does not fully establish experts as independent parties in the criminal justice process. Therefore, strengthening regulations regarding the mechanism for appointing experts by the court and standards for scientific methodology in providing expert testimony are crucial to improving the objectivity and quality of evidence in the Indonesian criminal justice system.    
Justice in Handling Environmental Crimes by Corporations: A Legal Philosophical Review of Postponement of Prosecution Nadya Karunia Normayunita; Rahadi Wasi Bintoro; Sri Wahyu Handayani; Jared Ivory
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 2 (2026): Contemporary Challenges in Law: Comparative Perspectives on Justice, Legal Pro
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i02.p04

Abstract

The paradigm of natural resource utilization in Indonesia refers to the principle of retributive justice that provides equal opportunities for communities to manage and utilize natural resources. However, corporations often engage in acts of environmental exploitation that lead to pollution and environmental damage. This study aims to analyze the postponement of prosecution against corporations committing environmental crimes from the perspective of legal philosophy and justice. The study was conducted using normative research and a legislative and conceptual approach. Secondary data will be collected through a literature study method and will be analyzed qualitatively descriptively. The results show that the postponement of prosecution agreement is a concrete implementation of the paradigm shift of justice from retributive to restorative because law enforcement efforts are carried out as much as possible outside the courts. However, this paradigm shift creates problems because the absence of criminal sanctions against corporations will risk the repetition of criminal acts in the future. Therefore, a balance is needed in the process of corporate law enforcement so that environmental restoration efforts can still provide an optimal deterrent effect.
Tri Hita Karana as a Restorative Justice Model: A Case Study of Decision No. 247/PID.B/2009/PN.Pwt Ni Made Gian Sari Astiti; Made Sugi Hartono; Abd Razak Bin Zakaria
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 2 (2026): Contemporary Challenges in Law: Comparative Perspectives on Justice, Legal Pro
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i02.p05

Abstract

This study aims to examine the concept of Tri Hita Karana (THK) as a restorative justice model within Indonesia's criminal justice system through an analysis of Court Decision No. 247/Pid.B/2009/PN.Pwt concerning the case of Grandmother Minah. Using normative legal research with a case approach and a conceptual approach, this study analyses how THK may serve as a philosophical foundation for restorative justice and explores the implications of integrating its values into legal regulations and law enforcement practices in resolving minor criminal offences involving vulnerable groups. The findings indicate that the judicial decision in Grandmother Minah's case reflects a predominantly formalistic and retributive approach that fails to fully achieve substantive justice. In contrast, the principles of Parahyangan, Pawongan, and Palemahan embodied in THK promote reconciliation, social harmony, and the restoration of relationships, which are consistent with the objectives of restorative justice. This study argues that integrating THK into Indonesia's criminal justice system may encourage a paradigm shift from punitive law enforcement toward restorative justice while strengthening legal protection for vulnerable communities. Accordingly, THK offers a culturally grounded philosophical framework that can contribute to future criminal law reform in Indonesia. 
The Role of Notaries in Preventing Nominee Arrangements: Legal Certainty and Productive Land Conversion I Ketut Agus Pramana Putra; I Putu Bagus Padmanegara; I Wayan Novy Purwanto; Matias Valenzuela
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 2 (2026): Contemporary Challenges in Law: Comparative Perspectives on Justice, Legal Pro
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i02.p06

Abstract

Nominee arrangements have become a prevalent mechanism for circumventing restrictions on foreign ownership of land under Indonesian agrarian law, particularly in regions experiencing intensive tourism and investment development. Beyond raising questions concerning the legality of land ownership, such arrangements contribute to productive land conversion and create challenges for legal certainty and land governance. This study examines the legal construction of nominee arrangements under Bali Regional Regulation Number 4 of 2026 concerning the Control of Productive Land Conversion and the Prohibition of Nominee-Based Land Ownership Transfer, as well as the role of notaries in preventing such practices. Employing normative legal research, this study applies statutory and conceptual approaches through the analysis of legislation, legal doctrines, and relevant scholarly literature. The findings demonstrate that nominee arrangements constitute a form of legal circumvention that conflicts with the nationality principle under the Basic Agrarian Law and the lawful cause requirement under the Indonesian Civil Code. Bali Regional Regulation 4/2026 provides a legal framework for prohibiting nominee arrangements and addressing their impact on productive land conversion, yet it leaves unresolved normative issues concerning parties acting as intermediaries, facilitators, or providers of means. Notaries therefore play a strategic preventive role through the preparation of authentic deeds, implementation of prudential principles, identification of beneficial owners, and application of the Principle of Recognizing Service Users. Regulatory harmonization is required to strengthen legal certainty and improve the effectiveness of preventing nominee-based land control and productive land conversion.
Civil Rights Protection of Political Parties as Private Legal Entities: Indonesia-Pakistan Comparative Study Post Constitutional Court Decision Number 60/PUU-XXII/2024 Tia Rahadatul 'Aisyi; Anisa Deny Setiawati; Febrian Indar Surya Kusuma; Qassim Hassan
Kertha Patrika Vol. 48 No. 2 (2026): Contemporary Challenges in Law: Comparative Perspectives on Justice, Legal Pro
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Udayana University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/KP.2026.v48.i02.p02

Abstract

Political parties in the Indonesian legal system act not only as political entities but also as private legal entities (rechtspersoon) possessing absolute civil rights. However, Article 40 of Law No. 10/2016 on Regional Elections, which imposed a nomination threshold based on legislative seats, restricted the legal capacity of non-parliamentary parties and negated the utility of valid votes as the organization's intangible assets. This normative legal research aims to analyze the implications of restoring the civil rights of political parties following the Constitutional Court Decision No. 60/PUU-XXII/2024, while expanding the analysis through a comparative approach with Pakistan's legal framework under the Political Parties Order (PPO) 2002. The results indicate that the Constitutional Court Decision No. 60/PUU-XXII/2024 serves as a restorative instrument that shifts the threshold basis back to valid votes to uphold the equality of legal entities. Based on the comparative synthesis, three typologies of regulatory models are identified: the Performance-Based Restriction Model (Indonesia pre-Decision 60/2024), the Compliance-Based Governance Model (Pakistan), and the Legitimacy-Based Proportionality Model (Indonesia post-Decision 60/2024). Through this comparison, Pakistan's experience demonstrates that the state can enforce internal party accountability without eliminating its fundamental civil right to nominate candidates, a governance direction that is now aligned with Indonesia's post-decision legal landscape.

Page 3 of 3 | Total Record : 28

 1   2   3 

Filter by Year

2025 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 48 No. 2 (2026): Contemporary Challenges in Law: Comparative Perspectives on Justice, Legal Pro Vol. 48 No. 1 (2026): Recalibrate Indonesia Law based on Legal Reform in Specific Sectors Vol. 47 No. 3 (2025): Reinterpreted Civil, Administrative, and Criminal Law into Indonesia Legal Dev Vol. 47 No. 2 (2025): Dynamics of Indonesia Law in National and International Perspectives