Criminal Law Enforcement against Illegal Gold Mining (Study of Decision No. 153/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.Mdl)

Xhifa Mayputeri Melati — 2025-07-19

General Background: Illegal gold mining has long served as a vital economic lifeline for communities in Lingga Bayu District, Mandailing Natal Regency. Specific Background: Despite its deep-rooted presence and socio-economic significance, such mining activities persist without formal governmental authorization, creating tension between legal norms and community livelihoods. Knowledge Gap: Existing legal enforcement often emphasizes punitive action, yet overlooks the structural socio-economic challenges faced by traditional miners. Aims: This study examines the implementation of criminal law enforcement against illegal gold mining and evaluates the fairness and justice outcomes of Decision Number 153/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Mdl by the Mandailing Natal District Court. Results: Findings indicate that while law enforcement adheres to normative legal standards and ensures legal certainty, it falls short in delivering substantive justice and long-term legal benefits for local miners. Novelty: The study highlights the misalignment between repressive legal mechanisms and the socio-cultural realities of community-based mining practices, advocating for a shift from a purely legalistic approach to one that is humanistic and transformative. Implications: The research suggests a need for integrative legal reform, including affirmative policies for people's mining legalization, to achieve holistic and sustainable justice for marginalized mining communities.

Highlights:

Highlights the gap between legal enforcement and local socio-economic realities.
Critiques the repressive nature of criminal law against traditional miners.
Proposes a transformative and inclusive legal reform model.

Keywords: Illegal Mining, Law Enforcement, Community Justice, Court Decision, Humanistic Approach

Appointment of Notaries under Indonesian and Singaporean Law

Viona Widjaja — 2025-07-16

General Background: Notaries play a vital role in society by providing legal certainty through authentic deeds. Specific Background: However, their status and appointment processes vary significantly depending on the legal system of a country. Knowledge Gap: There is limited comparative analysis regarding the appointment of notaries in civil law countries like Indonesia and common law countries like Singapore. Aims: This study aims to analyze and compare the legal frameworks governing the appointment of notaries in Indonesia and Singapore, highlighting their differences, similarities, strengths, and weaknesses. Results: The findings reveal significant differences in the appointment process, requirements, and supervisory authority. In Indonesia, notaries are appointed by the Minister of Law and Human Rights based on Law No. 2 of 2014, while in Singapore, the appointment is conducted by the Senate of the Singapore Academy of Law under the Notaries Public Act Chapter 208. Novelty: This study offers a focused comparative analysis of notarial appointment processes within two distinct legal traditions—civil law and common law—which is rarely addressed in previous literature. Implications: The results provide practical insights for legal practitioners and policymakers in Indonesia and offer considerations for improving the notarial appointment system in line with global best practices.

Highlights:

Highlights the structural differences in notary appointments between Indonesia and Singapore.
Reveals the impact of legal traditions (civil vs. common law) on notarial authority.
Provides insights to improve Indonesia’s notarial appointment process.

Keywords: Notary Appointment, Comparative Law, Civil Law, Common Law, Legal System

Rechtsidee

Criminal Law Enforcement against Illegal Gold Mining (Study of Decision No. 153/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.Mdl)

Appointment of Notaries under Indonesian and Singaporean Law