cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Dhiva Trenadi
Contact Email
dhivatrenadi@upnvj.ac.id
Phone
+6281330274228
Journal Mail Official
jicls@upnvj.ac.id
Editorial Address
Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta Jl. RS Fatmawati No. 1, Pondok Labu, Cilandak, South Jakarta, 12450 Indonesia
Location
Kota depok,
Jawa barat
INDONESIA
Ius Comparatum: Journal of Law Studies
Published by Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta
ISSN : -     EISSN : 31635628     DOI : https://doi.org/10.35586/icjls.v1i2.12314
Core Subject :
Ius Comparatum: Journal of Law Studies (ICJLS) is a peer-reviewed academic journal published in English by the Doctoral Programme of the Faculty of Law, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta. The journal is devoted to promoting scholarly discourse and innovation in the field of comparative legal studies, serving as a platform for the dissemination of research that bridges legal traditions, systems, and cultures. ICJLS focuses on research-based novelty and encourages contributions that offer original insights, critical analysis, and interdisciplinary approaches to legal issues from a comparative perspective. It aims to deepen the understanding of how different legal systems operate, interact, and evolve in response to global, regional, and local developments. Published three times a year, in January, May, and September, the journal covers a wide spectrum of legal disciplines, including but not limited to civil law, private law, constitutional law, human rights law, public health law, and civil society issues. ICJLS particularly welcomes manuscripts that explore the dynamics of legal convergence and divergence across jurisdictions.
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 20 Documents
 1   2 
Intersection Between Administrative Freies Ermessen and Maladministration in Strategic Nickel Industrial Area Development in Morowali Tegar Raffi Putra Jumantoro; Muhammad Fadirah Fauzi
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 1 No 2 (2025): Justice in The Legal System
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v1i2.12028

Abstract

The development of the nickel industrial zone in Morowali Regency reflects a critical intersection between administrative discretion (freies Ermessen) and the growing risks of maladministration. While the project, primarily through the Indonesia Morowali Industrial Park (IMIP), contributes significantly to national economic growth and global energy transition, its implementation often circumvents legal and ethical governance frameworks. This study employs a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches to examine the legal boundaries of administrative discretion within strategic national projects. Findings reveal that discretion has been exploited to accelerate permits, land acquisition, and fiscal incentives without sufficient public participation, transparency, or legal compliance. Such practices have led to environmental degradation, agrarian conflicts, and diminished public trust in government institutions. Key indicators of maladministration include abuse of authority, discriminatory policies favoring large corporations, procedural violations, and the absence of effective oversight mechanisms. The research underlines that discretion, when detached from its foundational legal and moral principles, transforms into a tool of unchecked bureaucratic power, undermining good governance and democratic values. It argues for stricter regulatory oversight, clearer discretionary boundaries, and participatory frameworks to prevent misuse in future development agendas. Ultimately, the paper contributes to advancing administrative law discourse by emphasizing the urgent need for institutional reforms to align discretionary practices with the principles of accountability, legality, and public interest in state administration.
Investment Contracts and Foreign Direct Investment: A Juridical Perspective Moch. Teguh Al Baisar
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 1 No 2 (2025): Justice in The Legal System
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v1i2.12314

Abstract

This research investigates the legal framework governing investment contracts and foreign direct investment (FDI) in Indonesia using a normative juridical approach that emphasizes statutory analysis and literature review. The inquiry is grounded in primary legal materials, including the Indonesian Civil Code (KUHPerdata) and Law Number 25 of 2007 concerning Investment, and is further enriched by secondary and tertiary materials to provide a broader context of the regulatory landscape. The study delves into the nature of investment contracts as instruments that create legal certainty, delineate rights and obligations, and ensure the fulfillment of commitments by the parties involved throughout the investment process. It emphasizes that investment contracts must fulfill the essential elements of a valid agreement as stipulated in Article 1320 of the Civil Code and are binding under the principle of pacta sunt servanda. Moreover, the analysis explores the interplay between investment contracts and various FDI structures, particularly joint ventures (PT PMA), as required by Indonesian law. It highlights key contractual components—such as capital participation, management rights, profit repatriation, stabilization clauses, and choice of law—that enhance clarity and predictability for investors while respecting the regulatory authority of the host state. The findings underscore the importance of a well-drafted investment contract in minimizing legal uncertainty, facilitating technology transfer, and promoting sustainable economic growth, which ultimately strengthens Indonesia’s appeal as a destination for foreign investment.
Citizenship and National Team Eligibility: Comparative Analysis between Indonesian Nationality Law and FIFA Regulation Muhammad Yaseer Zaydan; Raafid Febriansyah; Fathan Hariz
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 2 (2026): May-August (State Sovereignty, Membership, and Mobility: Comparative Perspectives
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i2.14796

Abstract

The phenomenon of football player naturalisation is growing alongside the globalisation of sports and the increasing cross-border mobility of players. In Indonesia, the policy on naturalising national team players is implemented under Law No. 12 of 2006 on Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, specifically through a naturalisation mechanism in the national interest. However, the citizenship status granted by the state does not automatically entitle a player to represent the national team in international competitions, as they must also meet the eligibility requirements set by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). This study aims to analyse the regulations governing the acquisition of citizenship for football players under Indonesian law and FIFA regulations, and to examine the legal implications of FIFA’s eligibility regulations for naturalised players representing Indonesia. This study is a normative legal study employing statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. The legal sources include laws and regulations, the FIFA Statutes, the Regulations Governing the Application of the FIFA Statutes, and relevant legal literature. The research findings indicate that Indonesia naturalises football players under Law No. 12 of 2006, while FIFA regulations determine eligibility to play for the national team by requiring a genuine link to the country being represented. This study found a dual legal regime between legal citizenship and sporting nationality, meaning that naturalised players must simultaneously meet both national citizenship requirements and FIFA eligibility criteria. Therefore, harmonisation between national citizenship laws and FIFA regulations is necessary to ensure legal certainty and the effectiveness of football player naturalisation policies in Indonesia
The State Sovereignty in Banned Entry Policy: A Comparative Study of the Indonesian and British Immigration Systems Muhammad Hanif Arkan; Maulvina Shanti Leavinita; Avishtya Siti Karaniya
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 2 (2026): May-August (State Sovereignty, Membership, and Mobility: Comparative Perspectives
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i2.14823

Abstract

The debate over absolute state sovereignty and the cross-border protection of human rights forms the basis of modern immigration law dynamics. This study analyses state sovereignty in entry-ban policies and compares the immigration legal systems of Indonesia and the United Kingdom. The main issue examined is Indonesia’s executive discretion in entry-ban decisions, which remains weakly accountable, while the UK system links discretion to judicial oversight. The research uses normative legal research through statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. The findings show that although both countries apply the jus exclusionis principle, the UK has a more institutionalised oversight mechanism through the First-tier Tribunal to assess public good parameters, whereas Indonesia still relies on broad ministerial authority without a public transparency obligation. This research's novelty lies in its cross-system comparison between civil law and common law, exploring the “grey area” of immigration discretion that earlier studies have not sufficiently discussed. In conclusion, Indonesia needs to renew its immigration law by adopting the due process of law principle to address transparency challenges without weakening national sovereignty. This study presents all parts, from the theoretical basis to the reform recommendations, comprehensively.
Parliamentary Oversight in Safeguarding the Constitution: A Comparative Analysis of the Constitutional Laws on Civil Emergencies in Indonesia and South Korea Khaidar Abdan Syakuran khaidar
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 1 (2026): January-April (Constitutionalism and Emergency Powers: A Comparative Study of Leg
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i1.14827

Abstract

Abstract: Both Indonesia and South Korea have authoritarian backgrounds that have shaped how their respective constitutions address states of emergency; however, the two countries currently find themselves in very different situations when it comes to addressing abuses of executive power during such situations. This study analyses the constitutional structure of civilian governance during a state of emergency in Indonesia, specifically Article 12 of the 1945 Constitution and Law No. 23 of the 1959 Prp on States of Emergency, in comparison with Article 77 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, which was put to the test during the military emergency declaration issued by President Yoon Suk Yeol in December 2024. Using a normative legal approach and comparative methods, this article demonstrates that the key factor distinguishing the two systems is not the delegation of emergency powers as outlined in the constitution, but rather the strength and efficiency of the parliamentary oversight mechanisms inherent in each. The South Korean Constitution requires the President to terminate a state of military emergency if a majority of the National Assembly requests it. This mechanism ended Yoon’s state of military emergency within six hours and ultimately led to his removal from office by a unanimous Constitutional Court decision in April 2025. In contrast, Indonesian Law No. 23 of 1959 lacks a corresponding legislative termination clause. This shortcoming became apparent during the civil emergency in Maluku and North Maluku, which lasted nearly three years from 2000 to 2003 based solely on a single presidential decree. This article argues that the agenda for reforming Indonesia’s emergency laws—repeatedly attempted and abandoned since the beginning of the reform era—must emphasise binding parliamentary review and judicial oversight rather than merely changing emergency categories. Keywords: Constitutional Law, States of Emergency, Civil Emergencies, Parliamentary Oversight
Constitutionalisation of Emergency Law: A Comparative Study of State of Emergency in Indonesia and the Philippines Aulia Cantika Maharani; Yasmeen Auliandini Arafah; Shaffa Nathaniela
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 1 (2026): January-April (Constitutionalism and Emergency Powers: A Comparative Study of Leg
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i1.14838

Abstract

Every democratic constitutional state recognizes the existence of emergency law as an extraordinary legal instrument. Indonesia and the Philippines, though sharing a presidential system and authoritarian historical backgrounds in Southeast Asia, have adopted fundamentally different approaches in regulating the state of emergency within their constitutional frameworks. Indonesia's Article 12 of the 1945 Constitution contains only two delegative sentences, leaving substantive regulation to legislation, whereas the Philippines constitutionalises emergency law comprehensively under Article VII Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution. The gap in the literature lies in the lack of studies that position the Philippines as Indonesia's comparative counterpart, as well as the lack of a holistic examination of how differences in regulatory levels shape the overall character of emergency law regimes in both countries. This study analyses and compares the regulation of the state of emergency in both constitutions in terms of constitutionalisation, legislative oversight mechanisms, and judicial review. Using normative juridical research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, this study finds that Indonesia's emergency law regime is normatively under-specified and institutionally fragile, lacking constitutional temporal limits, explicit legislative oversight, and judicial review of emergency proclamations. The Philippines, by contrast, establishes three layers of constitutional control: a sixty-day temporal limit, Congressional supremacy for extensions, and mandatory judicial review of the factual basis for proclamations. This study concludes that Indonesia requires fundamental reform by elevating essential norms temporal limits, parliamentary oversight, and judicial review to the constitutional level, in accordance with democratic rule of law principles post-amendment. Keywords: State of Emergency, Constitutionalisation, Legislative Oversight, Judicial Review, Comparative Studies
The Role of Parliament in Emergency Powers: A Comparative Study of Indonesia and the United Kingdom Alif Andika; Suluganwata Sihombing; Christian Joseph Silaban
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 1 (2026): January-April (Constitutionalism and Emergency Powers: A Comparative Study of Leg
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i1.14843

Abstract

Abstract: This research examines parliament's role in supervising executive emergency powers, comparing Indonesia’s presidential system with the United Kingdom’s parliamentary model. Grounded in debates on emergency constitutional law and parliamentary sovereignty, this normative legal research uses a comparative approach to analyse constitutional frameworks and legislative structures. Data were collected through a comprehensive literature review of secondary materials, including relevant emergency statutes. The findings show that Indonesia relies on a codified model in which the President has unilateral authority to issue Perpu based on subjective urgency, delaying DPR scrutiny to a retrospective stage. Conversely, the UK operates under parliamentary supremacy, utilising the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and fast-track legislation to enforce immediate ex-ante oversight. In conclusion, the structural differences show that a presidential system with a dominant executive coalition carries a higher risk of turning legislative oversight into a symbolic rubber stamp during crises. Keywords: Parliament, Executive. Emergency Power
Comparative Judicial Review of Emergency Declarations in Canada and Indonesia Marcha Jeanne Mawene; Nabila Aulia Adek Putri
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 1 (2026): January-April (Constitutionalism and Emergency Powers: A Comparative Study of Leg
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i1.14893

Abstract

Abstract: This normative legal research examines the structural challenges of judicial review over executive emergency powers by comparing Canada’s Emergencies Act of 1988 and Indonesia’s Government Regulations instead of Laws (Perppu) under Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution. The analysis reveals that Canadian federal courts apply a rigorous reasonableness standard based on strict intelligence thresholds, effectively maintaining constitutional boundaries and providing retroactive remedial relief. Conversely, the Constitutional Court’s judicialization of emergency powers in Indonesia suffers from systemic paralysis. This weakness stems from the strict application of the mootness doctrine when a Perppu is rapidly enacted into law, paired with the prospective nature of the Court’s rulings, which leaves a remedial vacuum for human rights violations. Ultimately, this study argues that Indonesia must reform its procedural framework by decoupling judicial timelines from legislative ratification and introducing interim measures to prevent the normalisation of executive exceptionalism. Keywords: Judicial Review, Emergency Powers, Perppu, Emergencies Act, Comparative Law
Deferred Prosecution Agreement In Handling Coporate Corruption : A Comparative Study Of Implementation In The United States and United Kingdom and Its Relevance For State Loss Recovery In Indonesia Ranisa Diati
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 2 (2026): May-August (State Sovereignty, Membership, and Mobility: Comparative Perspectives
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i2.14672

Abstract

Corporate corruption causes massive state financial losses and has systemic impacts on the national economy. Conventional prosecution mechanisms often cannot maximize state asset recovery while ensuring sustainable corporate governance reform. A Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) is a legal instrument that suspends prosecution against a corporation under specific conditions, including paying financial penalties, restoring losses, and implementing compliance programs. This research analyzes the legal framework and practical implementation of DPAs in handling corporate corruption in the United States and the United Kingdom, while evaluating their relevance and potential adaptation into Indonesia's legal system. Using a normative legal research method with a comparative approach, this study finds that DPAs in both jurisdictions have maximized state loss recovery, encouraged corporate cooperation, and prevented the negative collateral consequences of full prosecution. This research concludes that Indonesia must establish a comprehensive legislative foundation for DPA implementation, while upholding the principles of legal certainty, restorative justice, and public accountability.
Reformulating Multi-Layered Pre-Arrival Screening in Indonesia’s Immigration System: A Comparative Study with the United States Yasinta Diva Negara
Journal of Ius Comparatum Law Studies Vol 2 No 2 (2026): May-August (State Sovereignty, Membership, and Mobility: Comparative Perspectives
Publisher : Faculty of Law |Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/icjls.v2i2.14676

Abstract

The increasing mobility of foreign nationals resulting from globalization, technological advancements, and the expansion of international tourism has created both economic opportunities and immigration challenges for Indonesia. Although Indonesia applies the principle of selective policy as mandated under Law No. 6 of 2011 on Immigration, the continued rise in immigration violations, visa misuse, overstays, deportations, and detentions of foreign nationals indicates that existing screening mechanisms have not operated optimally. The current pre-arrival screening process, primarily regulated under Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 22 of 2023 concerning Visas and Stay Permits, remains largely dependent on document verification and interviews, creating limitations in detecting potential risks before foreign nationals enter Indonesian territory. This study aims to analyze the implementation of the selective policy principle in Indonesia, compare Indonesia’s pre-arrival screening mechanism with that of the United States, and formulate a multi-layered screening model to strengthen immigration control. This research employs normative legal research with descriptive-analytical and prescriptive approaches using statutory, conceptual, and comparative methods. Secondary legal materials consisting of legislation, academic literature, institutional reports, and policy documents are analyzed qualitatively. The findings reveal that while Indonesia possesses a strong normative foundation for implementing selective policy, its operational mechanisms remain less developed than the United States’ integrated pre-arrival screening system, which utilizes risk-based assessments, inter-agency data sharing, and technology-driven screening tools. This study proposes a multi-layered screening mechanism consisting of pre-test assessment, profiling interviews, and verification screening as a reformulation of Indonesia’s pre-arrival screening framework.

Page 2 of 2 | Total Record : 20

 1   2 

Filter by Year

2025 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 2 No 2 (2026): May-August (State Sovereignty, Membership, and Mobility: Comparative Perspectives Vol 2 No 1 (2026): January-April (Constitutionalism and Emergency Powers: A Comparative Study of Leg Vol 1 No 2 (2025): Justice in The Legal System Vol 1 No 1 (2025): Comparative Studies on Law Perspective