cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
M. Yasir Said
Contact Email
injurlens@gmail.com
Phone
+62821 5770 9493
Journal Mail Official
injurlens@bdproject.id
Editorial Address
Jl. Brigjen. Hasan Basri Komp. Polsek Banjarmasin Utara Jalur 3, Banjarmasin, Kalimantan Selatan 70125
Location
Kota banjarmasin,
Kalimantan selatan
INDONESIA
INJURLENS
Published by Scholar Center
ISSN : 28289137     EISSN : 27764974     DOI : https://doi.org/10.51749
Core Subject : Economy, Science, Social,
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Energy Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
International Journal of Law, Environment and Natural Resources (INJURLENS) ISSN 2828-9137 (Print) 2776-4974 (Online) is an international, scholarly open access journal on the topic of law, environment, and natural resources. It publishes reviews and regular research papers and there is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their research in as much detail as possible, whether theoretical, empirical, or experimental. INJURLENS follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Scholar Center takes the responsibility to enforce a rigorous peer-review together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure adding high-quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, do arise. We take such publishing ethics issues very seriously and our editors are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero-tolerance policy. To verify the originality of content submitted to our journals, we use Turnitin and iThenticate to check submissions against previous publications. Subject Areas Jurisprudence, Legal Theory, Philosophy of Law Criminal Law and Criminal Justice System Economic and Business Law Constitutional and Administrative Law Comparative Legal System Alternative Dispute Resolution Environmental Policy and Management Natural Resources Mineral And Geo-Resources Land And Ecological Resources Plant And Animal Resources Water Resources Energy Resources Food And Bio-Resources Resource Conservation, Reuse, And Recycling Sustainable Resource Management Resource Governance And Policy Circular Economy
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 2 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "vol. 6 no. 2 (2026): october issue" : 2 Documents clear
The problematics of plea bargaining implementation from the perspective of the principle of justice and due process of law in indonesia Sri Herlina; Noor Azizah; Salamiah Salamiah
International Journal of Law, Environment, and Natural Resources Vol. 6 No. 2 (2026): October Issue
Publisher : Scholar Center

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.51749/injurlens.v6i2.163

Abstract

Indonesia's criminal procedural reform under Law No. 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) introduces the Guilty Plea (Plea Bargain) mechanism as a new instrument intended to address the need for expeditious, simplified, and low-cost case resolution. The introduction of this mechanism raises fundamental questions concerning its position within a criminal justice system rooted in the civil law tradition, as well as its consistency with the principle of justice and the doctrine of due process of law. This study examines the regulatory framework and juridical standing of the plea bargaining concept within Indonesia's criminal justice system, and evaluates whether its implementation is consistent with the principle of justice and due process of law. The study employs normative legal research using the statute approach, the conceptual approach, and a limited comparative approach, analyzed qualitatively through legal reasoning and interpretation. John Rawls's Theory of Justice and Gustav Radbruch's Theory of Legal Certainty serve as the principal analytical frameworks. The findings indicate that the guilty-plea mechanisms codified in Articles 78, 205, and 234 of the KUHAP constitute three distinct arrangements that have not yet coalesced into a unified plea bargaining regime comparable to that of common law jurisdictions, but rather represent a selective adaptation that preserves the judge's active role and the orientation toward material truth. With respect to consistency with justice and due process of law, the implementation of guilty pleas is capable of achieving alignment where voluntariness of the admission, access to counsel, and substantive judicial oversight are consistently observed, yet risks departing from both principles where the imbalance between the defendant and the public prosecutor, procedural pressure, and the absence of detailed implementing regulation are left unchecked. The study concludes that more detailed implementing regulations and rigorous judicial supervision are required to prevent the guilty-plea mechanism from reducing substantive justice to mere procedural efficiency.
Legal certainty and clarity of formulation in the omnibus law technique in indonesia: from conditional unconstitutionality toward formal validity Lutfi Rahmathoni; Abdul Karim; Sri Herlina; Yulianis Safrinadiya Rahman
International Journal of Law, Environment, and Natural Resources Vol. 6 No. 2 (2026): October Issue
Publisher : Scholar Center

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.51749/injurlens.v6i2.164

Abstract

The application of the Omnibus Law technique in the formation of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation has raised problems of legal certainty within Indonesia’s civil law system, particularly with regard to the principle of clarity of formulation. Previous research has tended to discuss Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 and the regulation of the omnibus technique through Law Number 13 of 2022 separately, and therefore has not linked those developments to a continuing assessment of legal certainty. This study analyzes the implications of the change in the status of the Omnibus Law technique, as well as its legal certainty, based on the principle of clarity of formulation. The study employs a normative legal method using statute, conceptual, and case approaches. The results show that Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 located the problem in the procedural aspects of lawmaking and did not remove the requirement of meaningful participation, whereas the regulation of the omnibus technique through Law Number 13 of 2022 provides formal legitimacy without necessarily resolving the constitutional problems of the Job Creation Law. Substantively, the omnibus technique still faces problems of accessibility, predictability, and coherence due to its cross-sectoral scope and the complexity of its regulation. This study offers an indicator-based analytical framework for distinguishing formal legitimacy, constitutional validity, and substantive legal certainty in the formation of laws and regulations.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 2

 1 

Filter by Year

2026 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 6 No. 2 (2026): October Issue Vol. 6 No. 1 (2026): April Issue Vol. 5 No. 2 (2025): October Issue Vol. 5 No. 1 (2025): April Issue Vol. 4 No. 2 (2024): October Issue Vol. 4 No. 1 (2024): April Issue Vol. 3 No. 2 (2023): October Issue Vol. 3 No. 1 (2023): April Issue Vol. 2 No. 2 (2022): October Issue Vol. 2 No. 1 (2022): April Issue Vol. 1 No. 2 (2021): October Issue Vol. 1 No. 1 (2021): April Issue More Issue