Judgments of the ICJ are final and not subject to appeal. However, Article 61 of the ICJ Statute empowers the ICJ to review its judgments. The ICJ replaced the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ). Article 61 of the PCIJ Statute (1920) empowered the PCIL to review its decisions. When the PCIJ ceased to exist, Article 61 of its Statute was reproduced, almost verbatim, as Article 61 of the ICJ Statute. In this article, the author illustrates the drafting histories Articles 61 of the PCIJ (1920 – 1921) and ICJ (1945) respectively. The PCIJ did not invoke Article 61 of its Statute. The ICJ has so far invoked Article 61 in three judgments. It is illustrated that although the ICJ has not referred to the drafting history of Article 61 in its judgments, its interpretation of Article 61 is substantially consistent with its drafting history. The drafting history of Article 61 suggests that the first criterion that the Court is supposed to assess before deciding whether to exercise jurisdiction is whether the review application has been filed within the stipulated time. If the answer to this question is in the negative, the court should dismiss the application summarily and not discuss the other grounds of admissibility. However, practice from the Court shows that it has not followed this approach. It is also argued that the Court can invoke its inherent jurisdiction to extend the deadline for filing of review applications although the Statute and the Rules are silent on that issue.

This study examines the intersection of law and justice in the context of land ownership restrictions under agrarian reform in Indonesia, highlighting the tension between statutory frameworks and the pursuit of social equity. Indonesia’s Agrarian Law (Law No. 5 of 1960) and subsequent regulations were designed to redistribute land and promote equitable access, yet ownership restrictions and bureaucratic challenges often perpetuate structural inequalities, limiting the realization of true agrarian justice. This research critically analyzes the legal framework governing land tenure, including limits on private ownership, land certification, and redistribution programs, and evaluates their socio-legal implications for smallholder farmers and rural communities. The novelty of this research lies in its dual lens: it examines not only the legality of ownership restrictions but also their ethical and distributive impact, bridging legal analysis with normative considerations of justice. By situating Indonesian agrarian law within broader debates on social equity, the study identifies gaps between formal legal mechanisms and the lived realities of marginalized populations. The study contributes to both legal scholarship and policy-making by offering insights into how ownership restrictions can be reformed to better align with principles of fairness, equity, and community welfare. Ultimately, it argues that achieving agrarian justice in Indonesia requires both legal compliance and normative reforms that prioritize social justice alongside statutory regulation.

Judges play an important role in the implementation of law enforcement, as they are tasked with making decisions that reflect the principles of justice. In their decision-making process, judges must consider and align with the values embedded in the community, as the law exists to serve humanity, not the other way around. The concept of Amicus Curiae (friends of the court) refers to input provided by individuals or organizations that are not directly involved in a case but have a vested interest in its outcome. This research explores the significance of Amicus Curiae in the Indonesian legal system, specifically examining its potential to optimize legal justice. It also investigates how judges incorporate Amicus Curiae submissions into their decision-making process to ensure fair and just rulings. The research adopts a normative juridical approach, utilizing legal, case, comparative, and conceptual analyses. The findings reveal that Amicus Curiae can play a crucial role in enhancing the judicial process in Indonesia by providing valuable perspectives on facts and legal issues pertinent to the case. While it does not interfere with the core issues being examined by the judges, Amicus Curiae contributes to the overall understanding of the case, thereby facilitating more informed, equitable decisions. The presence of Amicus Curiae in legal proceedings ultimately supports the realization of justice by shedding light on important legal and factual matters.

The death of a parent profoundly affects a child’s well-being, particularly when caused by homicide committed by a father or the mother’s intimate partner. Research on gender-based killings, or femicide, identifies husbands, boyfriends, and former partners as the most common perpetrators. Yet, children of intimate partner femicide (IPF) victims remain largely invisible in both public discourse and legal protections. This study examines the impacts of IPF on children and evaluates how Indonesia’s legal system supports family recovery, particularly for children who have lost their mothers. Using a qualitative approach, the study draws on literature and an analysis of key Indonesian laws, including the Witness and Victim Protection Act, Criminal Procedure Code, Domestic Violence Elimination Act, Child Protection Act, and Sexual Violence Act. Findings indicate that IPF produces multifaceted harms, including physical and psychological trauma, social challenges, and legal vulnerabilities. Impacts are gendered: girls often assume caregiving roles and mediate between families, while all children experience instability in caregiving, financial insecurity, and increased exposure to trauma. Research on femicide in Indonesia is limited, particularly regarding its effects on children. The study highlights the need for legal reforms to clarify definitions of crime victims and strengthen the rights of family members, ensuring children’s access to comprehensive and sustainable recovery services. Addressing these gaps is crucial for promoting justice and protection for children affected by intimate partner femicide.

The Limited Liability Company (LLC) is characterized by its distinct juridical entity, effectively segregating its management group from shareholders. Operating as a business entity, the primary goal of an LLC is profit generation. Functioning as a corporate legal entity with legal personality, an LLC comprises three key organizational components: the General Shareholders’ Meeting, Directors, and Commissioners. Directors, or the Board of Directors (BOD), bear the responsibility of managing and representing the LLC both within and outside the legal realm. The position of BOD is mandated to be occupied by a natural person, or 'naturlijk person,' either as a single individual (Director) or collectively by two or more individuals (Board of Directors). Despite a stringent selection process for board positions, the inherent nature of directors as natural persons introduces the possibility of intentional or negligent errors in management, potentially leading to financial losses. In the face of such negligence, the pertinent question arises: can a commissioner (Board of Commissioners) and/or shareholders initiate legal action against a director or BOD, whose legal standing is as the company’s representative? To address this query, a comprehensive library research initiative is undertaken, focusing on the analysis of Article 97 and Article 98 of the Limited Liability Company’s legal statutes. This examination aims to elucidate the viable courses of action that can be pursued against the company in the event of directorial negligence. The research findings reveal that specific commissioners and/or shareholders, in the absence of a director's power of attorney, are granted the authority by the LLC’s legal statutes to initiate legal proceedings against the director or board of directors in a court of law.

The increasingly massive use of the internet is now affecting the economic world which is characterized by the birth of E-Commerce. E-Commerce mechanism that does not brings together sellers and buyers directly, this raises a variety of problems on the subjective and objective terms of the sale and purchase agreement. Smart Contracts are actually different from conventional contracts written on paper. They are also different from electronic contracts. A clause in the agreement, which takes the form of programming code, requires blockchain as a distributed storage technology, which sets them apart. In addition, Smart Contracts serve to execute contracts automatically. Therefore, the article aims to analyze the advantages of Smart Contracts compared to conventional contracts and how the validity of using smart contracts in Indonesian law, and why business transactions in Indonesia should start using smart contracts. The result obtained is that the use of Smart Contracts are completely automated and rely on software logic, making them transparent and visible to all parties involved. The use of Smart Contract in buying and selling transactions is considered very important considering the advantages in terms of security, verification, changes in the contents of the agreement, and evidentiary power. As for Indonesian law, the use of Smart Contracts is permissible as long as it does not violate the validity of the agreement as stated in the Civil Code. The use of Smart Contracts offer several advantages over traditional contracts, including trasparency, autonomy, speed, accuracy, security, and savings.

In the context of Indonesia as a State of Law, the imperative role of the rule of law cannot be overstated in realizing the state's objectives. The formulation of Legislative Regulations, essential for upholding the rule of law, necessitates meticulous consideration of three fundamental principles: benefit, justice, and legal clarity. To ensure the effectiveness of these regulations in aligning with the direction and goals of national legal development, the process adheres to key principles, encompassing the clarity of objectives, appropriate institutional involvement, congruence among types, hierarchy, and material content, practicability, clarity of formulation, and transparency. This procedural framework is consistently implemented in a sustainable, coordinated, and integrated manner. The legal landscape in Indonesia underwent significant transformations with the enactment of Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation, introducing the omnibus law technique. However, the subsequent Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 provisionally deemed this law unconstitutional. Responding to this decision, Law Number 12 of 2011 underwent a substantial amendment through Law Number 13 of 2022, specifically addressing the omnibus approach and enhancing meaningful public participation in statutory rule creation. This legal revision significantly influences the development of legal instruments at the regional level. Consequently, an examination of the implementation of regional legal product formation becomes imperative post the amendment of Law Number 12 of 2011 on the Formation of Legislative Regulations.

This paper delves into the transformative impact of digital platforms on the enforcement of Indonesian competition law. The advent of these platforms has revolutionized the competition law landscape, with their multisided nature marking a conceptual departure from traditional economic platforms. This study underscores the challenges faced by enforcement agencies in applying the efficiency and consumer welfare approach to business competition law cases involving digital platforms. Recognizing these challenges, there is a growing awareness of the need for an alternative enforcement perspective, notably emphasizing the principle of fairness. By combining an exploration of the unique challenges posed by digital platforms with the imperative for a nuanced enforcement approach, this research contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the complexities surrounding Indonesian competition law in the evolving digital era.

One of the informal professions in Indonesia is a domestic worker. The problem is that domestic workers have not received maximum protection related to their wages, comfort and work safety which causes them belittled because the lack of their awareness about the rights they supposed to get. This article was made to examine the issues faced by domestic workers and what steps can be taken to improve the bargaining position of domestic workers. The research method used is empirical sociological, focusing on primary data and interviews, supported by secondary data. Data collection and analysis were carried out qualitatively by using Anthon F. Susanto model through the stages of data triangulation. The conclusion is that in Government Regulation Number 2 of 2015 there are no details regarding the rights of domestic workers and there are no laws protecting domestic workers so there are still many violations against domestic workers.