Indonesian Minority Justice Review
Indonesian Minority Justice Review (e-ISSN: 3164-581X) is a peer-reviewed, open-access academic journal published by COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA in online format (electronic journal). First published in 2024, the journal is issued quarterly in January, April, July, and October. It provides an academic platform for scholars, researchers, legal practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to disseminate research and scholarly perspectives on minority rights, legal recognition, equality, and social justice in Indonesia and other multicultural societies. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, case studies, conceptual studies, policy analyses, and interdisciplinary scholarly works addressing legal and social issues affecting minority communities. Its scope includes minority rights, discrimination, equality before the law, freedom of religion and belief, ethnicity, gender equality and identity, disability rights, linguistic diversity, cultural rights, citizenship, and access to justice. It also welcomes studies on legal reform, public policy, governance, human rights, and institutional mechanisms for minority protection and social inclusion. The journal encourages interdisciplinary contributions from law and related fields, including political science, sociology, anthropology, religious studies, and international human rights. It aims to promote rigorous academic discussion and practical recommendations that contribute to legal reform, equality, human rights protection, social justice, and inclusive governance. The journal applies a double-anonymous peer-review process and an Open Access Policy, providing free and immediate access to all published articles. Copyright is retained by the authors, and articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License.
Articles
55 Documents
<![CDATA[When Majority Becomes Veto: Judicial Review of Religious Minority Exclusion in House-of-Worship Licensing in Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Fadhel Arjuna Adinda]]>;
<![CDATA[Ridwan Arifin]]>;
<![CDATA[Varun Chhachhar]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): January, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/fw5bac86
<![CDATA[Indonesia's constitutional framework formally guarantees freedom of religion and worship, yet religious minorities continue to encounter institutional barriers in establishing and maintaining houses of worship. This article examines how local licensing mechanisms may transform majority preferences into effective veto powers over the religious rights of minority communities. The study aims to identify the legal and institutional mechanisms through which seemingly neutral licensing requirements produce discriminatory outcomes. Employing normative juridical and socio-legal approaches, the research examines relevant constitutional provisions, regulations concerning houses of worship, selected judicial decisions, and documented conflicts involving religious minorities. The analysis focuses on the relationship between administrative discretion, local majoritarianism, and the state's positive obligation to protect minority rights. The article argues that the central problem is not merely the existence of restrictive requirements but the delegation of substantial regulatory power to institutions vulnerable to majoritarian pressure. Such arrangements may undermine equality before the law and transform procedural requirements into instruments of exclusion. The article proposes a rights-based interpretation of licensing authority, emphasizing proportionality, non-discrimination, and effective judicial oversight. It concludes that meaningful protection of religious minorities requires institutional mechanisms capable of preventing local majorities from exercising de facto veto power over constitutionally protected religious freedoms.]]>
<![CDATA[Citizenship Without Belonging: Legal Identity and the Continuing Marginalization of Indigenous Belief Communities in Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Siti Kurniawati]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): January, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/tcykh052
<![CDATA[Formal citizenship does not necessarily guarantee substantive equality for communities whose religious or spiritual identities fall outside dominant religious categories. This article examines the gap between formal legal recognition and lived citizenship among indigenous belief communities in Indonesia. It focuses on how administrative systems concerning civil registration, marriage, education, and public services may continue to reproduce exclusion despite constitutional and statutory recognition of the right to religious and spiritual freedom. Using a normative and socio-legal methodology, the study analyzes constitutional provisions, administrative regulations, relevant judicial developments, and selected cases involving indigenous belief communities. The article conceptualizes citizenship as extending beyond possession of legal identity documents to include equal recognition and effective access to public institutions. The analysis demonstrates that administrative neutrality may become discriminatory when institutional categories are designed around dominant religious assumptions. Although legal reforms have expanded formal recognition, implementation gaps continue to create unequal burdens for communities whose beliefs do not fit conventional administrative classifications. The article argues that substantive citizenship requires the state to redesign administrative practices according to principles of equality, dignity, and freedom of belief rather than merely adding formal recognition. It contributes to minority justice scholarship by connecting citizenship theory with everyday administrative exclusion and demonstrating how bureaucratic practices can sustain marginalization even after legal recognition has been formally achieved.]]>
<![CDATA[The Minority Child Before the Law: Best Interests, Religious Identity, and Custody Disputes in Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Muhammad Ilyasa]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): January, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/zvmmhr08
<![CDATA[Family disputes involving parents from different religious backgrounds create complex legal questions concerning children's religious identity, parental authority, and the best interests of the child. This article investigates how Indonesian law addresses children situated at the intersection of competing parental religious claims. The research seeks to assess whether existing legal frameworks adequately protect children from being treated merely as objects of parental or religious contestation. Employing a normative juridical and case-based approach, the study examines constitutional guarantees, child protection legislation, family law, relevant judicial decisions, and selected custody disputes involving interreligious families. The analysis applies the principle of the best interests of the child alongside freedom of religion, parental rights, and the child's emerging autonomy. The article argues that Indonesian legal reasoning tends to emphasize parental authority and religious affiliation while insufficiently recognizing the child's independent rights and evolving capacity. Such an approach may create situations in which religious identity becomes determined through litigation rather than through a child-centered process. The study proposes a more consistent interpretive framework that places children's dignity, psychological well-being, and developing autonomy at the center of judicial decision-making. It concludes that minority justice in family law requires courts to move beyond binary religious classifications and adopt child-centered adjudication capable of protecting children from the consequences of interreligious legal conflict.]]>
<![CDATA[Beyond Recognition: Constitutional Failure and the Everyday Justice of Indigenous Peoples in Indonesia's Agrarian Conflicts ]]>
<![CDATA[Amiludin Amiludin]]>;
<![CDATA[Suhadi Suhadi]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): January, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/hj0bfx59
<![CDATA[Constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples has not necessarily translated into effective protection against dispossession, land conflict, and resource exploitation. This article examines the gap between formal recognition and substantive justice in agrarian conflicts involving indigenous communities in Indonesia. The research asks why constitutional and statutory recognition frequently fails to provide effective remedies when indigenous territories overlap with state concessions, infrastructure projects, or corporate activities. Using a normative and socio-legal approach, the study analyzes constitutional provisions, legislation concerning indigenous peoples and natural resources, selected judicial decisions, and documented agrarian conflicts. The article argues that recognition-based approaches are insufficient when legal protection remains conditional upon complex administrative procedures and fragmented institutional authority. In practice, indigenous communities may be required to prove their existence, territorial boundaries, and customary status before accessing rights that should function as substantive guarantees. The analysis further demonstrates that the fragmentation of land, forestry, and local-government regimes creates structural barriers to effective remedies. The article therefore proposes a shift from recognition as a precondition toward recognition as an enforceable constitutional obligation accompanied by accessible remedies. It concludes that meaningful indigenous justice requires institutional coordination, stronger protection against dispossession, and judicial approaches that prioritize substantive equality over formalistic administrative classifications. The study contributes to debates on constitutionalism, indigenous rights, and transformative justice in Indonesia.]]>
<![CDATA[The Silent Discrimination of Administrative Law: How Local Regulations Produce Unequal Citizenship for Religious Minorities in Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Dwita Karen Anjani]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): January, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/6d533a45
<![CDATA[Discrimination against religious minorities does not always emerge through explicitly discriminatory legislation. It may instead operate through local administrative regulations that appear neutral but generate disproportionate burdens for minority communities. This article investigates how local regulations and administrative practices can produce unequal citizenship for religious minorities in Indonesia. The study employs a normative juridical and comparative approach by examining constitutional principles, national legislation, selected regional regulations, administrative practices, and judicial decisions involving religious freedom and minority protection. The analysis uses equality, non-discrimination, proportionality, and administrative justice as analytical frameworks. The article demonstrates that regulatory language emphasizing public order, social harmony, or community approval may provide broad discretion to local authorities while enabling majoritarian preferences to influence administrative decisions. Consequently, formal equality can coexist with substantive inequality. The study argues that administrative law should not be assessed solely according to procedural legality but also according to its distributive and rights-based consequences. It proposes stronger constitutional review of local regulations, clearer limits on administrative discretion, and effective remedies for minorities affected by discriminatory implementation. The article concludes that minority justice requires the transformation of administrative law from a system primarily concerned with governmental authority into a framework capable of actively preventing structural exclusion. This perspective broadens minority-rights analysis beyond explicit discrimination toward the less visible mechanisms embedded within ordinary governance.]]>
<![CDATA[Justice at the Margins of the Archipelago: Access to Legal Aid for Minority Communities in Eastern Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Muhammad Bahtiar Putranto]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/hpnkhz15
<![CDATA[Access to justice remains uneven across Indonesia, particularly for minority communities living in geographically remote and socioeconomically disadvantaged regions. This article examines the structural barriers faced by minority communities in accessing legal aid in Eastern Indonesia. The study focuses on geographical isolation, limited legal infrastructure, linguistic barriers, economic disadvantage, and institutional capacity as interconnected dimensions of exclusion. Using a socio-legal methodology, the research combines analysis of the legal framework governing legal aid with selected regional experiences and documented cases involving vulnerable and minority communities. The article argues that formal entitlement to legal aid does not necessarily produce meaningful access to justice when services are physically inaccessible, culturally inappropriate, or institutionally insufficient. The analysis reveals that conventional legal-aid models tend to treat access primarily as a question of eligibility and funding, while paying insufficient attention to geography, culture, language, and community-specific vulnerabilities. The study proposes an expanded conception of legal aid based on substantive accessibility, including community-based legal services, mobile legal assistance, culturally competent representation, and stronger cooperation between state institutions and civil society organizations. It concludes that legal aid should be understood as an essential component of minority justice rather than merely a procedural benefit available after a dispute arises. The article contributes to access-to-justice scholarship by connecting legal aid policy with territorial inequality and minority protection in geographically peripheral regions.]]>
<![CDATA[From Hate Speech to Social Exclusion: Rethinking Legal Protection for Religious Minorities in Indonesia's Digital Public Sphere ]]>
<![CDATA[Indah Sri Utari]]>;
<![CDATA[Ali Masyhar]]>;
<![CDATA[Ridwan Arifin]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/pacv9b83
<![CDATA[The expansion of digital communication has transformed the production and dissemination of hostility toward religious minorities in Indonesia. Online hate speech can extend beyond verbal harm by reinforcing social stigma, legitimizing discrimination, and contributing to offline intimidation and exclusion. This article examines the relationship between digital hate speech and the broader social marginalization of religious minorities. Using a normative and socio-legal approach, the study analyzes Indonesian legislation governing electronic communication, freedom of expression, religious freedom, and minority protection, together with selected cases and patterns of online discourse. The research applies a rights-based framework to assess the tension between freedom of expression and the state's responsibility to protect minorities from harmful forms of digital hostility. The article argues that existing legal responses frequently concentrate on individual statements and criminal liability while overlooking the structural and cumulative effects of digitally amplified hate. Algorithmic visibility, networked harassment, and repeated stereotyping may create environments in which minority groups are effectively excluded from equal participation in public discourse. The study proposes a broader regulatory framework combining legal accountability, platform responsibility, digital literacy, and effective remedies for targeted communities. It concludes that protecting religious minorities in the digital sphere requires more than criminalizing isolated expressions; it requires addressing the mechanisms through which digital hostility becomes social exclusion and undermines substantive equality.]]>
<![CDATA[Whose Culture Counts? Cultural Heritage, Tourism Development, and the Rights of Indigenous Communities in Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Andika Bangun Sanjaya]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/hanhgm05
<![CDATA[The commercialization of cultural heritage through tourism creates opportunities for economic development while simultaneously generating risks of cultural appropriation, dispossession, and exclusion for indigenous communities. This article examines the tension between tourism development and indigenous rights in Indonesia's cultural heritage governance. The study asks whether existing legal frameworks adequately protect indigenous communities whose cultural practices, knowledge, territories, and symbols become incorporated into tourism industries. Employing a normative and socio-legal methodology, the research examines legislation concerning cultural heritage, tourism, indigenous rights, intellectual property, and local governance, supplemented by selected cases of tourism-related cultural disputes. The analysis demonstrates that legal protection often focuses on preserving cultural objects and promoting economic value while insufficiently recognizing indigenous communities as rights-holders with authority over the use and representation of their cultural heritage. Such an approach risks converting living cultures into commercial assets while weakening community control over cultural meaning and benefits. The article argues for a rights-based model of cultural tourism that recognizes prior participation, community consent, equitable benefit-sharing, and collective cultural rights. It concludes that cultural heritage governance should move beyond preservation and commercialization toward a framework that protects indigenous agency and prevents tourism development from reproducing historical patterns of marginalization. The article contributes to minority justice scholarship by connecting cultural rights, economic development, and indigenous self-determination.]]>
<![CDATA[Minority Women Between Two Margins: Intersectional Justice in Land and Inheritance Disputes among Indigenous Communities ]]>
<![CDATA[Aprila Niravita]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/hnx30h75
<![CDATA[Women belonging to indigenous communities may experience overlapping forms of disadvantage arising from gender, customary status, economic position, and minority identity. This article examines the intersectional dimensions of land and inheritance disputes involving indigenous women in Indonesia. The research seeks to determine whether legal frameworks addressing indigenous rights and gender equality are capable of responding to vulnerabilities that arise simultaneously from multiple identities. Employing an intersectional socio-legal methodology, the study analyzes constitutional provisions, customary law, statutory frameworks, judicial decisions, and selected disputes involving land and inheritance. The article argues that single-axis approaches to discrimination are inadequate because they may recognize either women's rights or indigenous rights while overlooking the interaction between the two. In certain circumstances, indigenous women may face exclusion from customary land while simultaneously experiencing institutional barriers when seeking protection through state law. Conversely, interventions designed exclusively around gender equality may weaken culturally specific forms of community governance without addressing the structural causes of dispossession. The study therefore proposes an intersectional model of minority justice that recognizes women's individual rights alongside collective indigenous rights. It concludes that effective legal protection requires institutions capable of identifying overlapping vulnerabilities and designing remedies that avoid reproducing either gender-based or cultural marginalization. The article contributes to intersectionality scholarship by applying the framework to property, inheritance, and indigenous justice in Indonesia.]]>
<![CDATA[The Right to Be Heard: Minority Participation and Procedural Justice in Indonesian Public Policy-Making ]]>
<![CDATA[Rodiyah Rodiyah]]>;
<![CDATA[Ratih Damayanti]]>
<![CDATA[ Indonesian Minority Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April, 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.65815/r297v361
<![CDATA[Legal equality may remain incomplete when minority communities are excluded from decisions that directly affect their rights and interests. This article examines minority participation in Indonesian public policy-making through the perspective of procedural justice. The study investigates whether existing consultation mechanisms provide meaningful opportunities for minority communities to influence decisions or merely satisfy formal requirements of administrative procedure. Using a normative and socio-legal approach, the research analyzes constitutional principles, legislative procedures, administrative regulations, selected policy-making processes, and cases involving affected minority groups. The article employs procedural justice concepts including voice, neutrality, respect, and trustworthiness to evaluate the quality of participation. The analysis argues that formal consultation does not necessarily constitute meaningful participation when communities lack timely information, institutional access, adequate representation, or mechanisms through which their objections can influence final decisions. Minority participation may therefore become symbolic rather than substantive. The study proposes a participatory framework requiring early consultation, accessible information, representative engagement, reasoned responses to minority objections, and effective review mechanisms. It concludes that the right to be heard should be understood as a substantive component of equality and minority protection rather than merely an administrative formality. By connecting procedural justice with minority rights, the article demonstrates that fair outcomes depend not only on the content of governmental decisions but also on whether marginalized communities are treated as legitimate participants in the processes through which those decisions are produced.]]>
