One plausible challenge that may emerge throughout the application of sharia law in Aceh, for instance, is the presence of interreligious disputes. The fact that not all members of communities are Muslims poses an inquiry. This research examines how Sharia law is enforced in Aceh; how legal protection for non-Muslims is affected by the enforcement, as well as, to the same topic, how the comparison between Aceh and of Selangor, Malaysia is. According to this empirical study, Qanun was created in Aceh to secure adherence to sharia law, so that Qanun Jinayat applies to community members identified as Muslim. In contrast, Malaysia is a multiethnic and multiracial nation governed by the supreme law, namely the Federal Constitution, which protects its diverse religion and communities. Sharia law applies exclusively to Muslims in Selangor, in stark contrast to jinayah law in Aceh which apply this to Aceh citizen. Hence, stakeholders in Aceh must collaborate to assess and fortify legal safeguards for non-Muslim inhabitants, extending beyond the freedom to select the form of justice they prefer. The objective is to guarantee the rights of each citizen in a manner that is devoid of violence or any indications of human rights violations.

This study critically examines the existing legal framework for personal data protection within Indonesia’s population administration system. Through a normative legal research approach, it identifies significant regulatory gaps that leave personal information vulnerable to misuse and breaches. The results show that the current legal policies remain insufficient, as numerous aspects of personal data protection have yet to be explicitly regulated in the Population Administration Law. Despite the enactment of a national personal data protection law, its effectiveness is undermined by the lack of comprehensive integration into the Population Administration Law. This research proposes reconstructing the legal framework to address essential aspects of data management—such as collection, utilization, safeguarding, exchange, and misuse prevention—while establishing clear access rights, prohibitions on unauthorized activities, and a structured system of proportional sanctions. By incorporating specialized legal provisions and aligning with international best practices, these reforms would strengthen Indonesia’s data protection framework, enhance public trust, and reinforce the government’s role in safeguarding citizens’ personal information.

Even though Indonesia has promulgated Act Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Principles Regulations, this regulation cannot provide legal certainty and justice for the parties in the sale and purchase of land rights agreements. When judges decide cases involving property rights sale and purchase agreements, they base their decisions on legal procedures and sources, which demonstrate this uncertainty and injustice. The legal sources as references are varied, sometimes BW (Burgerlijk Wetboek, Adat Law (Customary Law), or Act Number 5 of 1960 with Government Regulatiion Number 24 of 1997. This article uses a normative legal research method. In analysis, to create a land rights sale and purchase agreement that can provide legal certainty and justice, the issue needs to be regulated, especially regarding the issue of the various legal sources, and the responsibility of the state in providing legal certainty. For sales and purchase agreements to provide legal certainty and justice, the state must move from a negative publication system to a positive publication system to realize the constitutional rights of Indonesian citizens in Article 28 D UUD 1945.

The lack of uniformity among judges in interpreting the criteria for buyers' good faith in land sale and purchase cases results in less favorable outcomes for buyers. This study aims to compare the regulations and implementations of the principle of good faith in land transactions in the United States, the Netherlands and Indonesia. Utilizing a statutory and conceptual approach, supplemented by comparative analysis, this research examines the relevant laws and concepts, including contractual rules and regulations governing sales and purchases. The findings indicate that the legal system significantly influences how countries regulate the principle of good faith—either concretely or abstractly. This influence is closely tied to the concepts of written legal sources, jurisprudence, and the practical application of the principle in statutory regulations. Generally, Indonesia, like other countries, faces challenges in implementing the principle of good faith, particularly for buyers, due to the lack of a definitive benchmark to assess whether agreements are executed in good faith and fairness. To address this issue, the regulation of good faith and its criteria should be clearly articulated in written laws. Ensuring that the principle of good faith is applied throughout the entire land buying and selling process—from pre-contractual stages to contract execution—is crucial for providing adequate protection for buyers acting in good faith.

Indonesia has the potential for oil from old wells of 10,000 barrels per day, but this potential is not optimally regulated. Hence, its management cannot realise social justice. This research aims to provide a prescription for the distribution of benefits and public participation in managing petroleum in old wells because all provisions for old wells do not accommodate the public interest. This research uses normative legal research utilising a statutory, conceptual, and case approach to analyse the regulation policy related to old wells management. Data were collected by investigating primer and seconder legal material. The results show that the distribution of benefits related to profit-sharing for oil management services at old wells did not reflect justice. Thus, it is causing a lot of illegal mining activities. Moreover, public participation in determining policies is still at the pseudo participation (informing level). Therefore the actual participation has not been accommodated in related regulations of old wells management.

Objective: Yogyakarta Palace is a kingdom that existed before Indonesia became independent. Generally, a country can adopt a monarchy as a system of government that applies nationally. However, uniqueness emerged in recognizing the privileges of the Kingdom of Yogyakarta in Indonesia, which still has the authority to regulate its territory but is also under the auspices of the Republic of Indonesia. In response to this phenomenon, this article was created to answer questions regarding (1) a comparison of monarchical systems in the world, (2) the Validity of the Yogyakarta Palace area as a Special Region in Indonesia, and (3) DIY Government Policy Strategy in maintaining and managing the unique features of Yogyakarta. From the results of this analysis, this study aims to provide alternative recommendations for recognizing the kingdom's authority based on practices that occur in Indonesia.   Method: The study uses normative juridical research methods with a conceptual and statutory approach. The theory of asymmetric decentralization is the analytical tool used to see the chain of validity of the privileges of the Yogyakarta Palace.   Result: The results of the analysis show that the authority of the King of the Yogyakarta Palace to lead the Yogyakarta Special Region Province is a form of asymmetric decentralization practice that is different from the implementation of other monarchical systems in the world.   Conclusion: Based on these findings, it can be concluded that a King's authority to regulate his territory does not have to be within the realm of a monarchical system of government. Recognition of the unique features of the Yogyakarta Palace in Indonesia has proven that a kingdom can exist within the territory of a Republic that practices an asymmetric decentralized system. For this reason, further research is needed that can examine unique regional management strategies to strengthen regional autonomy and fiscal independence.