cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Desi Sommaliagustina
Contact Email
nawalaedu@gmail.com
Phone
+6281374694015
Journal Mail Official
nawalaedu@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Jl. Raya Yamin No.88 Desa/Kelurahan Telanaipura, kec.Telanaipura, Kota Jambi, Jambi Kode Pos : 36122
Location
Kota jambi,
Jambi
INDONESIA
Ipso Jure
Published by PT Anagata Sembagi Education
ISSN : -     EISSN : 30327644     DOI : https://doi.org/10.62872/55p1zf80
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Ipso Jure is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal dedicated to advancing scholarly research and discourse in the field of law, with a particular emphasis on the principles of the rule of law. The journal aims to provide a platform for academics, legal practitioners, policymakers, and researchers to address contemporary legal issues and trends that shape societies globally. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0), ensuring free access and reuse with proper attribution. Focus Ipso Jure focuses on exploring current and emerging legal challenges that influence the development and application of the rule of law. The journal seeks to publish original research that offers innovative perspectives, rigorous analysis, and practical insights into legal systems, theories, and practices. By fostering interdisciplinary and comparative approaches, Ipso Jure aims to contribute to global legal scholarship and promote dialogue among diverse legal traditions. Scope The journal welcomes original research articles, theoretical analyses, and policy reviews that address issues and trends in the following areas of law: Administrative Law Agrarian Law Banking Law Civil Law Commercial Law Comparative Law Constitutional Law Corporate Law Criminal Law Cyber Law Economic Law Environmental Law Human Rights Law International Law Legal Philosophy and Theory Legal Sociology Types of Contributions Ipso Jure primarily publishes original research articles (3,000–5,000 words) that present empirical findings, theoretical insights, or critical analyses. The journal also considers high-quality review articles or policy analyses that align with its scope and contribute significantly to legal scholarship. All submissions undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure academic quality and integrity, as outlined in our Publication Process. Audience The journal targets a global audience, including: Legal scholars and researchers seeking to advance knowledge in law. Legal practitioners addressing practical challenges in their fields. Policymakers and government officials shaping legal frameworks. Students and educators exploring contemporary legal issues. Commitment to Open Access As an open access journal, Ipso Jure ensures that all published content is freely accessible to readers worldwide without financial or legal barriers. Authors retain full copyright of their work, and articles are licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0, promoting the widest possible dissemination and reuse of research. For submission details, please refer to our Author Guidelines. For questions about the journal’s focus and scope, contact the editorial team at nawalaedu@gmail.com.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 224 Documents
 19   20   21   22   23 
JURIDICAL REVIEW OF THE DETERMINATION OF NATIONAL TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW Salsabila Mareski; Wijayono Hadi Sukrisno; Adystia Sunggara
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 7 (2026): Ipso Jure - August
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/d4frhb17

Abstract

The determination of national territorial boundaries is one of the most important aspects of international law because it is directly related to sovereignty, jurisdiction, national security, and relations between countries. The clarity of territorial boundaries determines the scope of a country's authority in carrying out its governmental functions and exercising its rights based on international law. In the practice of international relations, territorial boundary disputes still often occur in land, sea, and air areas. These disputes generally arise due to differences in interpretation of international agreements, historical factors, economic interests, and unclear international legal norms that govern territorial delimitation. This study aims to analyze the arrangement of the determination of national territorial boundaries according to the provisions of international law and analyze the mechanism for resolving disputes over the territorial boundaries of countries recognized in international law. The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The legal materials used consist of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials obtained through literature studies and qualitatively analyzed. The results of the study show that the regulation of national territorial boundaries in international law is sourced from the United Nations Charter, customary international law, international agreements, and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982. In addition, the settlement of territorial boundary disputes can be carried out through negotiation, mediation, conciliation, international arbitration, and settlement through the International Court. The existence of these various mechanisms shows that international law has provided adequate instruments in maintaining order and stability in relations between countries
Land Registration as an Instrument of Legal Certainty and Legal Protection of Land Rights From The Perspective of Indonesian Agrarian Law Raisha Zahra Amanda; Juli Raya Syahputra; Aisyah Aisyah
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 6 (2026): Ipso Jure - July
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/te29n419

Abstract

Land occupies an important position in Indonesian society because it possesses economic, social, cultural, and legal values. The increasing value of land creates a need for a land administration system capable of providing certainty regarding the subject, object, and legal status of land rights. Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Principles establishes land registration as an instrument for achieving legal certainty. This study aims to analyze the position of land registration within Indonesian agrarian law, the forms of legal certainty and protection generated through land registration, and the relevance of the land registration system in the era of digital land services. This research applies normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The analysis employs Gustav Radbruch’s theory of legal certainty, Philipus M. Hadjon’s theory of legal protection, and Soerjono Soekanto’s theory of legal effectiveness. The study finds that land registration constitutes an important instrument for ensuring legal certainty and protection; however, a land certificate does not constitute absolute evidence of ownership. Legal certainty can only be achieved when physical data, juridical data, certificate issuance procedures, and actual possession of land correspond with one another. Electronic land registration may improve efficiency and transparency, but it must be supported by accurate data, reliable information systems, and effective protection of lawfully acquired land rights.
The Effectiveness of Law Enforcement in Indonesia: Institutional Challenges and the Pursuit of Substantive Justice Muthia Sakti
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 8 (2026): Ipso Jure - September
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/v2hj5074

Abstract

Indonesia's post-Reformasi legal order rests on a persistent tension between the formal constitutional promise of the rule of law and the practical realities of institutional fragmentation, executive-driven legislation, and uneven accountability. This article examines the trajectory of legal reform in Indonesia since the collapse of the New Order in 1998, focusing on whether successive waves of statutory reform have produced a legal system that is genuinely responsive to social needs and accountable to democratic oversight. The study is built on normative legal research, supplemented by a socio-legal reading of how constitutional text interacts with institutional practice, political incentive, and enforcement capacity. Four contemporary case studies anchor the analysis: the constitutional amendment process and its checks-and-balances architecture; the omnibus legislative technique embodied in the Job Creation Law and its constitutional aftermath; the 2019 revision of the Corruption Eradication Commission Law and its institutional consequences; and the codification of the new National Criminal Code. The discussion is organized into two results-and-discussion themes: first, the structural and doctrinal evolution of the rule of law within Indonesia's plural and decentralized legal order; and second, the institutional strategies through which responsive and accountable governance can be operationalized, spanning legislative participation, anti-corruption enforcement, and judicial oversight. The article argues that legal reform cannot be measured by the volume of enacted statutes alone; it must be measured by the extent to which legal institutions become responsive to social demands and accountable for the exercise of public power. The article closes with policy recommendations directed at reorienting Indonesia's reform agenda toward substantive rather than merely formalistic rule of law.
The Transformation of Indonesian Law in the Digital Era: Legal Challenges, Regulatory Responses, and the Protection of Public Interests Neri Aslina
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 8 (2026): Ipso Jure - September
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/zkxc3e10

Abstract

The rapid expansion of digital technology in Indonesia—spanning electronic commerce, financial technology, social media, and cloud-based data processing has fundamentally reshaped the relationship between citizens, businesses, and the state, while exposing significant gaps in the country's legal architecture. This article examines the legal challenges produced by digital transformation, the regulatory responses adopted by the Indonesian government, and the extent to which these responses protect the public interest. Employing normative juridical research through statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, this study analyzes primary legal materials including Law No. 11 of 2008 on Electronic Information and Transactions as twice amended, Law No. 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection, and sectoral financial technology regulations—alongside secondary academic literature published between 2021 and 2026. The findings indicate that Indonesia's digital legal framework remains fragmented, reactive, and unevenly enforced, particularly with respect to personal data governance, cybersecurity, consumer protection in electronic commerce, and supervision of financial technology platforms. At the same time, recent regulatory responses demonstrate a discernible shift toward a more adaptive and responsive model of law, informed by comparative frameworks such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation. The article concludes that safeguarding the public interest in the digital era requires not merely the enactment of new statutes but the institutional strengthening of supervisory authorities, cross-sectoral regulatory harmonization, and sustained investment in digital legal literacy among law enforcement officials, businesses, and citizens alike.
Legal Reform in Indonesia: Strengthening the Rule of Law through Responsive and Accountable Governance Sahuri Lasmad
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 8 (2026): Ipso Jure - September
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/4x883w13

Abstract

:  Indonesia's post-Reformasi legal order rests on a persistent tension between the formal constitutional promise of the rule of law and the practical realities of institutional fragmentation, executive-driven legislation, and uneven accountability. This article examines the trajectory of legal reform in Indonesia since the collapse of the New Order in 1998, focusing on whether successive waves of statutory reform have produced a legal system that is genuinely responsive to social needs and accountable to democratic oversight. The study is built on normative legal research, supplemented by a socio-legal reading of how constitutional text interacts with institutional practice, political incentive, and enforcement capacity. Four contemporary case studies anchor the analysis: the constitutional amendment process and its checks-and-balances architecture; the omnibus legislative technique embodied in the Job Creation Law and its constitutional aftermath; the 2019 revision of the Corruption Eradication Commission Law and its institutional consequences; and the codification of the new National Criminal Code. The discussion is organized into two results-and-discussion themes: first, the structural and doctrinal evolution of the rule of law within Indonesia's plural and decentralized legal order; and second, the institutional strategies through which responsive and accountable governance can be operationalized, spanning legislative participation, anti-corruption enforcement, and judicial oversight. The article argues that legal reform cannot be measured by the volume of enacted statutes alone; it must be measured by the extent to which legal institutions become responsive to social demands and accountable for the exercise of public power. The article closes with policy recommendations directed at reorienting Indonesia's reform agenda toward substantive rather than merely formalistic rule of law.
Balancing Legal Certainty and Substantive Justice in Indonesia: Rethinking the Role of Judicial Interpretation Asman
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 8 (2026): Ipso Jure - September
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/4bk0wr33

Abstract

Indonesian judges are constitutionally required to secure both fair legal certainty and substantive justice, yet the legal order gives them little guidance on how to proceed when the two values collide. This article examines how the mandate of judicial interpretation is structured in Indonesian law, how courts have exercised it in practice, and how the balance between certainty and justice can be made more principled. It employs normative juridical research that combines statutory, conceptual and case approaches, drawing on the 1945 Constitution, Law No 48 of 2009, the new Criminal Code, and a purposive body of court decisions and scholarship published between 2021 and 2026. The analysis proceeds through Radbruch’s triad of justice, legal certainty and expediency. The findings show, first, that Indonesian law imposes a dual mandate on judges but supplies only one ordering rule, Article 53(2) of the Criminal Code, which instructs judges to prioritise justice without stating a threshold for doing so. Second, judicial practice falls into three patterns: certainty-protective interpretation, justice-driven interpretation that remains anchored in the text, and unstructured judicial creativity that relies on the language of justice without demonstrating it. Third, the article proposes a four-stage framework of principled balancing consisting of a textual boundary, a threshold of intolerable injustice, proportionality with least departure from predictability, and reasoned institutional consistency. The article concludes that legal certainty and substantive justice are best reconciled not by ranking one above the other, but by disciplining the way judge reason when they depart from the text.
Normative Resilience: The Resilience of Legal Norms in the Face of Social Change Ester Balebu; Suzanna Lumeno
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 8 (2026): Ipso Jure - September
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/bv747094

Abstract

This article examines the concept of normative resilience, namely the ability of legal norms to maintain their relevance, binding power, and effectiveness amidst ongoing social change. Social change is a historical inevitability that inherently challenges the established legal system. On the one hand, the law is required to be stable and certain to provide legal certainty for society. On the other hand, the law must be adaptive and responsive to social dynamics to avoid losing its substantial legitimacy. This dialectical tension between stability and adaptability is at the core of the concept of normative resilience. Using qualitative-conceptual normative legal research methods, this article analyzes the theoretical foundations of legal norm resilience through the perspectives of legal sociology, legal philosophy, and comparative law. The results show that legal norm resilience is not synonymous with stasis or resistance to change, but rather represents the dynamic capacity of legal norms to adapt while maintaining the core substance of the values ​​they protect. This article concludes that normative resilience can be achieved through progressive legal interpretation mechanisms, participatory legal development, and the strengthening of legal institutions oriented towards substantive justice
Protection of Customary Rights in the Management Rights Scheme for Oil Palm Plantation Investment Herlina Lidiyawati; Johni Najwan; Umar Hasan
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 9 (2026): Ipso Jure - October
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/gqdvmg57

Abstract

Government Regulation No. 18 of 2021 and Regulation of the Minister of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/Head of the National Land Agency (BPN) No. 18 of 2021 allow customary land to be designated as Management Rights (HPL), promising legal certainty for indigenous communities in oil palm plantation investments. Previous studies have assessed HPL from the perspective of harmonization or registration, but have not examined it article by article throughout the HPL cycle and linked it to plantation agreements and disputes. This article analyzes the inequalities in investment agreements on customary land, critically examines HPL regulations, and formulates a reconstruction of its protection. This normative legal research uses legislative, conceptual, and case-based approaches, using the Jambi case as the primary source and comparisons from West Sumatra, Riau, Central Kalimantan, and Papua. The results show that HPL creates subjugating recognition: original customary rights are constructed as a transfer of control rights to the state. Indigenous communities' control is eroded through spatial planning, cultivation rights (HGU) that can last for almost a century, and multi-layered procedures. The lack of a mechanism to resolve overlapping rights also whitewashes HGUs issued without legal customary land release. This article's novelty lies in the reconstruction of HPL as a vehicle for benefit sharing without land release, with free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) as a sustainable agreement, and a hierarchical, integrative dispute resolution process. The article recommends derivative regulations that make HPL a voluntary option, establish minimum standards for agreement content, and unify customary land registration.
Regulation of Crypto Assets from the Perspective of Islamic Economic Law: A Comparative Study of the Concepts of Māl, Gharar, and Speculation and Their Implications for Digital Financial Policy Ika Hartika
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 9 (2026): Ipso Jure - October
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/zfts4185

Abstract

This article examines how Islamic economic law evaluates crypto assets and what that evaluation implies for digital financial policy, using the concepts of māl (property), gharar (excessive uncertainty), and speculation (maysir or qimar) as its analytical axes. It employs a normative juridical method that combines statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, and it draws on the Qur’an, the Sunnah, the 2021 ruling of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), Indonesian financial regulation, the resolutions of the Shariah Advisory Council of the Securities Commission Malaysia, and scholarly literature published mainly between 2021 and 2026. The analysis yields two principal findings. First, crypto assets are best treated not as a single juristic category but as a family of instruments whose qualification as māl and as a valid object of sale (silʿah) depends on exclusive control, an identifiable function, certainty of quantity, and the possibility of actual or constructive possession; the currency function is the hardest to reconcile with Islamic monetary criteria and with Indonesian currency law. Second, price volatility alone does not amount to gharar, whereas structural opacity, unreliable custody, leveraged trading, and derivative structures move crypto markets closer to prohibited gharar and maysir. The comparison with Malaysia shows that embedding Sharia determination within the capital-market regulator produces a more predictable, function-based framework than the Indonesian separation between religious fatwa and state regulation. The article concludes by proposing a Sharia-screening layer for the list of tradable assets, disclosure and custody safeguards, restrictions on leverage and derivatives, and institutional channels between fatwa authorities and the Financial Services Authority (OJK).
Legal Certainty in Sharia Business Contracts: Protecting the Rights of Contracting Parties Lina Maulidiana; Nugroho Noto Diharjo; Andriansyah Kartadinata
Ipso Jure Vol. 3 No. 9 (2026): Ipso Jure - October
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/d0mbge30

Abstract

Legal certainty is the precondition on which contractual trust in Islamic commerce is built, yet Sharia business contracts in Indonesia operate at the intersection of religious normativity, civil law, and sector-specific regulation. This article examines how legal certainty is constructed in Sharia business contracts and how the rights of contracting parties are protected when that certainty falters. Using a normative juridical method supported by statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, the study analyses statutes, a landmark constitutional decision, fatwas of the National Sharia Council, and scholarship published between 2021 and 2026. The findings show that certainty is produced by three interlocking layers: the substantive validity requirements drawn from fiqh muamalah and the Civil Code, the institutional architecture that turns fatwas into enforceable obligations, and the procedural forum in which disputes are finally adjudicated. Uncertainty persists where fatwas lack direct statutory force, where standard clauses displace genuine bargaining, where court decisions on the same contract type diverge, and where digital platforms outpace regulation. The article argues that protecting contracting parties requires a shift from formal compliance to substantive fairness grounded in balance, transparency, and good faith, supported by clearer dispute clauses, a codified role for fatwas, and digitally aware supervision. The study concludes with recommendations for legislators, regulators, courts, and contract drafters.

Page 22 of 23 | Total Record : 224

 19   20   21   22   23 

Filter by Year

2024 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 2 No. 12 (2026): Ipso Jure - January Vol. 3 No. 9 (2026): Ipso Jure - October Vol. 3 No. 8 (2026): Ipso Jure - September Vol. 3 No. 7 (2026): Ipso Jure - August Vol. 3 No. 6 (2026): Ipso Jure - July Vol. 3 No. 5 (2026): Ipso - June Vol. 3 No. 4 (2026): Ipso - May Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Ipso Jure - April Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): Ipso Jure - March Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Ipso Jure - February Vol. 2 No. 11 (2025): Journal of Ipso Jure-December Vol. 2 No. 10 (2025) Vol. 1 No. 12 (2025): Ipso Jure - January Vol. 2 No. 9 (2025): Ipso Jure-October Vol. 2 No. 9 (2025) Vol. 2 No. 8 (2025): Ipso Jure - September Vol. 2 No. 7 (2025): Ipso Jure - August Vol. 2 No. 6 (2025): Ipso Jure - July Vol. 2 No. 5 (2025): Ipso Jure - June Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Ipso Jure - May Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Ipso Jure - April Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Ipso Jure - March Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Ipso Jure - February Vol. 1 No. 11 (2024): Ipso Jure - December Vol. 1 No. 10 (2024): Ipso Jure - November Vol. 1 No. 9 (2024): Ipso Jure - October Vol. 1 No. 8 (2024): Ipso Jure - September Vol. 1 No. 7 (2024): Ipso Jure-August Vol. 1 No. 6 (2024): Ipso Jure - July Vol. 1 No. 5 (2024): Ipso Jure- June Vol. 1 No. 4 (2024): Ipso Jure - May Vol. 1 No. 3 (2024): Ipso Jure - April Vol. 1 No. 2 (2024): Ipso Jure - March Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Ipso Jure - February More Issue