Sriwijaya Law Review
The Sriwijaya Law Review known as the SLRev launched on the 31st January 2017 and inaugurated formally by the Rector of the university is a forum which aims to provide a high-quality research and writing related to law. Areas that relevant to the scope of the journal cover: business law, criminal law, constitutional law, administrative law, and international law
Articles
307 Documents
<![CDATA[Legal Consequences of Disobedience of Provisional Decision of the Administrative Court ]]>
<![CDATA[Sri Winarsi]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 8 Issue 1, January 2024 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.Vol8.Iss1.3201.pp152-170
<![CDATA[The existence of a legal vacuum in the State Administrative Court (PTUN) procedural law relating to the execution of the PTUN Provisional Decision raises the issue of Judicial Disobedience by state administrative institutions that do not want to carry out the PTUN Provisional Decision. Departing from this, there are two main problem formulations, namely: (1) What are the characteristics of PTUN provisional decisions? and (2) What is the formulation of legal protection against non-compliance with PTUN provisional decisions? Furthermore, this legal research uses a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach. Based on an examination of existing legal issues, it can be concluded that provisional decisions are known in PTUN procedural law practice, where provisional decisions are submitted for matters deemed essential (urgent circumstances) by the Plaintiff to the Panel of Judges to be decided in an Interim Decision. Suppose the Party ordered by the PTUN does not implement the PTUN provisional decision. In that case, 2 (two) legal preventive mechanisms and 3 (three) legal repressive remedies can be taken in stages: 1) Sending a letter to the relevant agency, 2) Reporting to the Ombudsman, and 3) Using Criminal Law Mechanisms.]]>
<![CDATA[The Influence of Transjudicial Conversation in the Cross-fertilization of Philippine Human Rights Jurisprudence ]]>
<![CDATA[James Gregory Alcaraz Villasis]]>;
<![CDATA[Naparat Kranrattanasuit]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 8 Issue 2, July 2024 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.Vol8.Iss2.3574.pp393-416
<![CDATA[Transjudicial conversation refers to the domestic court's judicial practice of cross-citing foreign decisions on common and shared human rights issues. Scholars have argued that this phenomenon facilitates the cross-fertilisation of rights norms and standards across territories. While this has been documented and studied in various jurisdictions, its incidence and effect in the Philippine context is yet to be fully understood. The paper thus seeks to explore the extent of such influence in the Philippine setting, specifically in the development of domestic human rights jurisprudence. In order to examine its impact, this research employs a qualitative research design. Select cases on free speech and religious exercise rights were analysed using doctrinal and content analysis approaches. These cases were purposively chosen, considering that Philippine provisions on these rights have shown close affinity with foreign constitutions. The analysis reveals that the participation of the Philippine Supreme Court in the transjudicial conversation phenomenon generally causes the cross-border fertilisation of human rights norms. Particularly, the impact of this engagement contributes to filling the gap in the domestic understanding of human rights concepts, expanding existing legal systems such as human rights and penal laws, and aligning national human rights systems with international laws. Such impacts enrich the domestic understanding of free speech and religious rights, specifically drawing bright lines between legitimate state intervention and individual enjoyment of the rights.]]>
<![CDATA[Philosophical Underpinnings of Social Insurance Mechanisms within the Framework of Health Insurance ]]>
<![CDATA[Theta Murty]]>;
<![CDATA[Sukarmi Sukarmi]]>;
<![CDATA[Yenny Eta Widyanti]]>;
<![CDATA[Amelia Sri Kusuma Dewi]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 8 Issue 2, July 2024 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.Vol8.Iss2.3665.pp303-317
<![CDATA[Indonesia, as a country that adheres to the concept of a welfare state, seeks to achieve social welfare development by implementing a national social security system, particularly health insurance, managed by the Health Social Security Administration Agency (BPJS). It is regulated in Article 19, paragraph 1 of Law No. 40 of 2004 concerning the National Social Security System (SJSN). The fundamental principles of social insurance include mandatory participation, equitable health coverage, and contributions proportional to income. The philosophical issue at hand is whether implementing health insurance via the social insurance mechanism effectively guarantees the interests of the community while upholding the values of welfare and justice, as prescribed by the concept of the welfare state. This paper analyses the philosophical foundation underlying social insurance as a mechanism for implementing health insurance in Indonesia. This study employs normative research methods, utilising legislation as the analytical starting point. A philosophical examination is necessary to understand why, after a decade of implementing national health insurance, the state's goal of achieving welfare and social justice in health services for Indonesian citizens remains unmet. This analysis seeks to identify new mechanisms to fulfil the goals outlined in Law No. 40 of 2004.]]>
<![CDATA[Human Rights Violations and Corporate Criminal Liability: An Analysis of the New Indonesian Criminal Law ]]>
<![CDATA[Mia Amiati]]>;
<![CDATA[Adhryansah Adhryansah]]>;
<![CDATA[Iman Prihandono]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 8 Issue 2, July 2024 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.Vol8.Iss2.3687.pp230-248
<![CDATA[In light of the increasing role of corporations in facilitating gross human rights violations, this article seeks to evaluate the implementation of the Indonesian Criminal Law in addressing corporate criminal liability. Notably, the recently amended Indonesian Criminal Law recognizes corporations as subjects of criminal law, but Law No. 26 of 2000, which regulates gross human rights violations, does not. Consequently, this research specifically scrutinizes the Indonesian Criminal Code, Law No. 26 of 2000, and international legal standards to answer the issues: rules of aiding and abetting under international criminal law and the applicability of corporate culture theory, and the implementation of Indonesian Criminal Law in addressing corporate criminal liability for gross human rights violations. Examining these issues relies on three methodologies, namely the statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. The results of this article uncover that the recognition of corporations as subjects under the new Indonesian Criminal Code and rectification of the ratione materiae of Law No. 26 of 2000 open the avenue for corporations to be held criminally liable for gross human rights violations based on aiding and abetting. Furthermore, the theory of corporate culture envisaged in the new Indonesian Criminal Code renders the plausibility of holding corporations liable if they are deemed to cultivate a culture that pushes or encourages a gross human rights violation. ]]>
<![CDATA[Adat Law as a Foundation for Advancing Indonesian Agrarian Law to Maximise Societal Welfare ]]>
<![CDATA[Firman Muntaqo]]>;
<![CDATA[Febrian Febrian]]>;
<![CDATA[Alip Dian Pratama]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 8 Issue 2, July 2024 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.Vol8.Iss2.3710.pp376-392
<![CDATA[The evolution of agrarian law in Indonesia, particularly land law, must adhere to the constitutional mandate of promoting the welfare of the populace. This subject is compelling because existing studies predominantly address the legal-formal dimensions of customary land law without adequately examining its practical implications for public welfare. This research investigates whether the development of Indonesian land law is in accordance with the Agrarian Law and explores how to formulate legal frameworks that mitigate land disputes and conflicts related to the utilisation of Ulayat Land for development purposes. The objective is to present alternative recommendations for resolving national agrarian law issues, often diverging from constitutional directives. Employing a normative research method, this study draws on both legal and non-legal materials through philosophical, legislative, historical, conceptual, comparative, and futuristic lenses. The findings reveal that the current development of national agrarian law does not fully align with the Agrarian Law's mandate to enhance the welfare of the Indonesian people. Therefore, this research offers alternative legislative methods aimed at producing agrarian legal instruments that more effectively promote the prosperity of the Indonesian population.]]>
<![CDATA[Human Rights Defenders in Indonesia's Digital Age: Navigating Limited Spaces in the Quest for Digital Democracy ]]>
<![CDATA[Rahayu Rahayu]]>;
<![CDATA[Kholis Roisah]]>;
<![CDATA[Khansadhia Afifah Wardana]]>;
<![CDATA[Vania Lutfi Safira Erlangga]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 8 Issue 2, July 2024 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.Vol8.Iss2.3860.pp358-375
<![CDATA[The enactment and application of the Electronic Transaction Information Law are pivotal for delineating the appropriate boundaries for exercising freedom of opinion and expression within Indonesia's digital sphere. According to reports from international digital rights research and advocacy organizations, online media journalists and human rights activists frequently encounter direct pressure and cyber harassment. This article explores the balance of freedom of expression in Indonesia's digital domain to ensure a secureenvironment for human rights defenders advocating for human rights. This study uses socio- legal methodologies to draw on data from literature reviews and in-depth interviews. It underscores the need for regulatory reforms to define prohibited hate speech explicitly. SAFENet documented 153 cyber-attacks in Indonesia in 2022, predominantly targeting civil society groups, students, activists, and journalists. Additionally, the National Committee on Human Rights reported that 52% of attacks on human rights defenders occurred in the digital realm. While the protection of digital democracy varies by nation, Indonesia must establish aninstitution responsible for properly enforcing the ITE Law alongside an independent monitoring mechanism and related policies. Such institutions, including those dedicated to human rights defenders, uphold human rights and demonstrate a commitment to the principles of freedom, respect, equality, and dignity within society.]]>
<![CDATA[Public Support for Plea-Bargaining in Serious Economic Crimes in Indonesia: Compatibility of Current and Modified Plea-Bargaining Models ]]>
<![CDATA[Febby Mutiara Nelson]]>;
<![CDATA[Pricilla Amelinda Jacob]]>;
<![CDATA[Haykal Hafizul Arifin]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 10 Issue 2, July 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.v10i2.4951
<![CDATA[The incorporation of plea bargaining into Indonesia’s Criminal Procedure Code has generated debate regarding its suitability for serious economic crimes. While existing discussions have primarily focused on its compatibility with Indonesian criminal procedure, empirical research examining public attitudes toward plea bargaining in Indonesia remains limited. Using survey data collected through non-probability sampling, the study compares public support for the conventional criminal justice system, restorative justice approaches, the restricted and a modified plea bargaining models. The findings demonstrate that respondents expressed greater support for the modified plea-bargaining model than for other mechanisms. Grounded in Cognitive Continuum Theory, the findings demonstrate that support for plea bargaining is shaped by the quasi-rational mode of cognition, whereby individuals rely on both moral evaluations of punishment and rational assessments of whether the punishment is proportionate to the offender’s actions and their impact on victims.]]>
<![CDATA[Rethinking Indonesia’s Legislative Drafting Style: Codification, Omnibus Legislation, and the Limits of the Guide of Legislation ]]>
<![CDATA[Fitriani Ahlan Sjarif]]>;
<![CDATA[Efraim Jordi Kastanya]]>;
<![CDATA[Aditya Wahyu Saputro]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 10 Issue 2, July 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.v10i2.5093
<![CDATA[Indonesia's legislative drafting framework requires all laws and regulations to comply with the Guide of Legislation because non-compliance may result in judicial invalidation. Although legislative drafting is expected to adhere to these formal standards, recent codification and omnibus law-making have introduced new drafting techniques that are not expressly accommodated within the existing framework. Despite extensive discussion of codification and omnibus legislation, limited attention has been paid to their compatibility with Indonesia's legislative drafting rules and the consequences for legal certainty and legislative validity. This article examines whether the 2023 Penal Code and the Job Creation Law conform to the drafting standards outlined in Law Number 12 of 2011 and explores the implications of any deviations. The study employs doctrinal legal research, using statutory and case analyses of the 2023 Penal Code, the Job Creation Law, and relevant legislative drafting principles. The findings reveal that both legislative models create tensions with the prescribed drafting framework. The Penal Code departs from the required structure of general provisions, while omnibus legislation obscures amendment history and adopts purposive naming that may diminish legislative transparency. The article argues that every legislative drafting innovation should first be formally institutionalised within the Guide of Legislation before its implementation to safeguard clarity, legal certainty, and the constitutional validity of enacted laws.]]>
<![CDATA[Women's Underrepresentation in Iraqi Parliamentary Committees: A Constitutional Analysis of Equality and Parliamentary Representation ]]>
<![CDATA[Esraa Alsamee]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 10 Issue 2, July 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.v10i2.5114
<![CDATA[Despite the constitutional guarantees of equality and women’s political participation under the Iraqi Constitution, women remain underrepresented in parliamentary committees, particularly in influential committees responsible for legislative oversight and policymaking. This article examines whether the legal framework governing committee formation effectively implements the constitutional principles of equality and representative democracy. The study adopts a doctrinal legal methodology, supported by comparative legal analysis, examining the Iraqi Constitution, the Rules of Procedure of the Council of Representatives, relevant national legislation, and applicable international legal instruments, particularly the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The analysis indicates that constitutional guarantees of parliamentary representation have not consistently translated into substantive participation in parliamentary committees. The findings suggest that existing committee allocation procedures, together with political party practices and the absence of binding legal criteria, restrict women's access to influential committees and may weaken the effective realisation of constitutional equality. The article argues that electoral quotas alone are insufficient to ensure substantive constitutional equality. It concludes that strengthening the legal framework governing committee membership, together with transparent allocation procedures and institutional safeguards, would better support women's effective participation in parliamentary decision-making.]]>
<![CDATA[Regulating “Pick One of Two” Practices in the Platform Economy: A Comparative Competition Law Analysis of Thailand and China ]]>
<![CDATA[Nengjie Jiang]]>;
<![CDATA[Pornchai Wisuttisak]]>
<![CDATA[ Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 10 Issue 2, July 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.28946/slrev.v10i2.5395
<![CDATA[The rapid growth of food delivery platforms has made "Pick One of Two" practices a key issue in competition law enforcement. While both China and Thailand regulate "Pick One of Two" practices under their respective competition laws, the central challenge lies not in whether such practices should be regulated but in how competition authorities should determine whether they constitute competition law infringements. Drawing on the post-Chicago School as its theoretical perspective, this article examines the shortcomings of Thailand's competition law framework in determining the legality of "Pick One of Two" practices and explores how China's enforcement experience may inform improvements to Thailand's legal regime. The study adopts a doctrinal legal research method combining comparative legal analysis and case studies. It finds that Thailand's Trade Competition Act (TCA) suffers from deficiencies in determining market dominance, defining market power, distinguishing between the two concepts, and evaluating the competitive nature of "Pick One of Two" practices. In practice, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT) places excessive emphasis on market share while paying insufficient attention to network, lock-in, and competitive effects in the platform economy. This article proposes refining the legal criteria for determining market dominance, clarifying the relationship between market dominance and market power , and adopting an effects-based approach in enforcement.]]>
