cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Faisal Herisetiawan Jafar
Contact Email
ichaljafar@gmail.com
Phone
+6281934228444
Journal Mail Official
sangianibandera@lawusn.or.id
Editorial Address
Faculty of Law, Universitas Sembilanbelas November Kolaka Jl. Pemuda No. 339, Kolaka, Sulawesi Tenggara, Indonesia
Location
Kab. kolaka,
Sulawesi tenggara
INDONESIA
Sangia Nibandera Law Research
Published by Universitas Sembilanbelas November Kolaka
ISSN : 30642000     EISSN : 30641349     DOI : -
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Sangia Nibandera Law Research (ISSN 3064-1349 / 3064-2000) is dedicated to advancing critical, contextual, and forward-looking legal scholarship that responds to the evolving dynamics of law in society. The journal focuses on interdisciplinary and comparative legal studies, emphasizing the interaction between law, culture, governance, and social justice. Its scope encompasses, but is not limited to, constitutional law, criminal law, civil law, environmental law, international law, and legal theory. The journal particularly welcomes research that explores indigenous legal perspectives, regional legal developments, and transformative legal reforms, especially within emerging and marginalized contexts. By promoting rigorous analysis and innovative approaches, Sangia Nibandera Law Research aims to serve as a platform for academics, practitioners, and policymakers to engage in meaningful dialogue, contribute to legal development, and shape responsive legal systems for the future.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 32 Documents
 1   2   3   4 
Judicial Review Of Parliamentary Oversight on The Issuance of the Job Creation Emergency Law from the Check and Balances Perspective Firna Dwi Ananda; Muhamad Aksan Akbar; Syamsul Rijal
Sangia Nibandera Law Research Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Sangia Nibandera Law Research, June 2026
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sembilanbelas November Kolaka

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21075720

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the mechanism of the implementation of the House of Representatives (DPR) oversight function towards the issuance of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu) based on the 1945 Constitution and evaluate the application of the principle of checks and balances in the procedure of issuance and approval of Perppu Number 2 of 2022 concerning Job Creation into Law Number 6 of 2023. The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach. The results of the study indicate that normatively, the 1945 Constitution has explained a strong mechanism of checks and balances where the DPR acts as a constitutional gateway through its legislative and supervisory functions to test the President's subjectivity regarding the parameters of "compelling urgency" as stipulated in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 138/PUU-VII/2009. However, the fact that the ratification of the Perppu on Job Creation indicates a weakening of the principle of checks and balances and is merely a mere formality. The House of Representatives (DPR) tends to ignore substantive material review and bypass emergency parameters to accommodate executive-heavy policies, as well as ignoring Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 concerning the obligation for meaningful public participation. This study recommends the need to codify the standard parameters of constitutional emergencies and strengthen parliamentary institutional independence.
Exporting Black Gold Means Importing Power Outages: The Juridical Failure of Indonesia's Coal Distribution Governance Irsan Rahman
Sangia Nibandera Law Research Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Sangia Nibandera Law Research, June 2026
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sembilanbelas November Kolaka

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21105756

Abstract

Indonesia, as the world’s largest exporter of thermal coal, experienced rolling blackouts across Java in June 2026, affecting power generation capacity by up to 2 GW a paradox that illustrates the legal failure of the Domestic Market Obligation (DMO) policy. This study aims to analyse the structural, governance and policy failures within the DMO framework in ensuring national energy security. The study employs a normative legal method (doctrinal legal research), utilising legal, conceptual and case-based approaches, whilst analysing primary legal sources. The findings reveal three interrelated levels of failure. Firstly, structural and legal failures: the fixed price cap of US$70 per tonne, which has remained unchanged since 2018, creates an “Export Premium Paradox” whereby the law mandates compliance, whilst the market actually incentivises non compliance through a price differential of US$54 78 per tonne between domestic and global prices, thereby undermining the normative effectiveness of the legislation. Secondly, governance failures: production restrictions (the 400 million tonne cap set by the RUEN versus actual production of 817 million tonnes), bureaucratic obstacles within the RKAB, weak law enforcement lacking credible deterrents, and systemic corruption (exposed through the KPK’s investigation into mining permits) exacerbate the DMO’s legal shortcomings. Thirdly, policy failure: reactive crisis management such as export bans, production cuts and blending regulations merely addresses temporary symptoms, whilst the underlying price-setting mechanism remains unreformed. This theoretical contribution demonstrates that a static regulatory framework collapses under dynamic market conditions, thereby challenging the command-and-control approach. This study recommends six reforms: dynamic price setting linked to the HBA benchmark; quality specifications; production coordination aligned with the RUEN; enhanced law enforcement with proportionate sanctions; anti-corruption measures; and a constitutional review based on Article 33(3). This case offers broader lessons for resource-rich developing countries: legal certainty and proportionality.

Page 4 of 4 | Total Record : 32

 1   2   3   4 

Filter by Year

2024 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Sangia Nibandera Law Research, June 2026 Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Sangia Nibandera Law Research, December 2025 Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Sangia Nibandera Law Research, June 2025 Vol. 1 No. 2 (2024): Sangia Nibandera Law Research, December 2024 Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Sangia Nibandera Law Research, June 2024