• Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law

The Institute for Migrant Rights
Publication date:


As a premier Global South-based scholarly publication, The Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law is the first of its kind. The Journal aspires to serve as an influential international forum for scholarly analysis, that advancing leading edge debates in legal discourse and beyond. Since its first publication, it has garnered wide critical acclaim in the service of reinvigorating the reconceptualization of the law reform enterprises in beyond the Western world. By positioning itself in the vanguard of scholarship, the published viewpoints are curated from a wide range of contributors, starting from novices to multiple Pulitzer Prize winning authors. The Journal has regularly illuminated pressing legal questions across the continent, prominently cited by, among many others, the U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York in the U.S. v. Chin Chong and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the State of Hawaii and Ismail Elshikh v. Donald J. Trump et al. In addition to being listed as cited in many world’s eminent law journals, its unique nature has allowed the Journal’s publications to transgress the impenetrable boundaries of the academia, including the prestigious L.A. Times, Human Rights Watch’s World Report, and the American Bar Association’s India Law News.

Latest documents

  • Notes on Contributors
  • Business and Human Rights: Human Trafficking in Fisheries Industries

    In March 2015, Associated Press released a story which investigated the link between human trafficking and the global fishing industry. The story immediately gained traction in the local media, and, soon after, the attention of Indonesian government as well as the global community. Afterward, the story sparked local investigations into illegal fishing, slavery, and human rights abuses on fishing boats. This opened the flood gates to many other accounts of human rights abuses across Southeast Asia by large fishing businesses. In response, this paper explores how large fishing companies commit international related crimes, such as, illegal fishing and human rights abuses using relative applicable international, regional, and Indonesian law. More specifically, this paper meticulously focuses on two vitally important interrelated problems in Southeast Asia, with a particular emphasis on Indonesia’s fishing industry. These larger problems reveal a set of acute problems that are categorized as illegal, unreported and unregulated Fishing (“IUU”) and the prevalence of human trafficking within that industry. In so doing, this paper will explore the empirical challenges Indonesia faced due to these problems. Following Indonesia’s empirical challenges, an analytical discussion explores the various causes to these problems, as well as a presenting a recommendation section. In addition, a discussion on The Ministerial Regulation of Fisheries Management System and Certification standards, which includes an action plan initiative in combating human trafficking in the fishing industry, providing a viable solution to the enforcement problem is also presented.

  • Legal Fallout: The Legality of Nuclear Weapons under International Law

    Legal Fallout argues that while nuclear weapons are illegal under the modern regime of international law, they were legal at the end of World War II and throughout the Cold War. The article makes these arguments by giving a brief history of nuclear weapons and the tenets of international law that govern their use, and how the bulk of international humanitarian law indicated that use of the weapons was legal until recently. It considers the evolution of international law, and how that evolution ultimately led to nuclear weapons becoming unacceptable. Finally, Legal Fallout considers a hypothetical scenario where nuclear weapons could still be legal, even under the modern iteration of international humanitarian law.

  • Humor as Pedagody: Evidence from Bosnia and Herzegovina

    This article critically explores the pedagogical possibilities of humor in the tertiary classroom, using Bosnia and Herzegovina, a small state in southeastern Europe (population: 3.5 million people) as case study, and the classical theories of humor—notorious for their general contempt for humor as intellectual tool—as point of departure. The paper makes an interrelated, three-fold, argument. First, contrary to the teachings of the three major theories of humor, particularly Incongruity Theory which portrays jokes as in-consonant with logic and rationality, humor has a key role in education. Second, just like many societies, Bosnia and Herzegovina has within its cultural system and milieu, the wherewithal for humor-based instructions that its educational policymakers at all levels need to tap into. Third, building on the first two points and reinforcing them, Bosnian laws and policies do not forbid creative use of humor in higher education. Two reasons make this study significant. The first is the concept of boundary that it elaborates for judicious application of humor in the tertiary classroom in Bosnia and Herzegovina and beyond. Second, while in no way sacrificing rigor in a field sometimes disparaged for its intellectual lightweight-ness, this paper is informed by multiple perspectives that include the authors’ subjective experiences in private higher education as lecturers, mentors, and administrators at the International University of Sarajevo.

  • Why are Indonesian Law School No Good
  • Notes on Contributors
  • Sovereign Wealth Funds and Investor-State Dispute Settlement: The Interplay between Domestic and International Investment Law

    Having managed to impose the prevalence of its interests in the twentieth century, inter alia, through ideas of "internationalization" of investment agreements signed between host states and private foreign investors and right of access, it is perhaps ironic to observe countries of the Global North seeking refuge in the caves of protectionism as evidenced in their recently-issued domestic laws. Now that the flow of FDI is no longer moving in one direction, developed countries have increasingly tasted the bitterness of presuming the role of the "host state of investments". Upon the conclusion of Global Financial Crises of 2007-2009, developed states have grown worrisome of the considerable rise in the importance of sovereign investors in general, and sovereign wealth funds ("SWFs") in particular, especially now that their assets under management have reached trillions of dollars. As a result of various concerns which developed countries have concerning investments made by SWFs, developed countries have been keen on taking necessary steps to control, or even block, foreign investments made by these funds. Recourse to national law to treat potential problems that naturally fall within the realm of international investment law, however, is problematic and is arguably not the best approach. States cannot invoke their domestic laws to rid themselves of international obligations which are incorporated in international investment agreements ("IIAs"). Guarantees against discrimination, including national treatment ("NT") and most-favoured-nation ("MFN") clauses, and fair and equitable treatment ("FET") can prove quite problematic for developed countries resorting to protectionist measures. A finding of breach of any of these substantive standards of protection by an investment arbitration tribunal entails the liability of the host state that committed the breach. On the basis of this discussion and analysis, the present piece of work emphasizes the importance of realizing the interplay between domestic and international law in the field of international investment law, and points to the inherent flaws and dangers of abandoning international obligations for protectionist measures. It further points to the existence of double standards in how developed countries have reacted to problems of foreign investment law in the twentieth century and in the present time.

  • The Brazilian Anti-Corruption Law: A New Way to Control the Relationship between Public Administration and the Private Sector

    Corruption is a very serious problem in Brazil. Since 1990, more than 50 laws have been enacted to combat misuse of public resources. Law 12.846, that entered in to force in 2013, has been commonly known as the "Corporate Anti-Corruption Law." Despite the traditional moral system, Law 12.846/2013 emphasizes private entities, which refreshes the Brazilian legal scheme of anti-corruption programs. In addition, it focuses on prevention. Thus, the objective of this paper, is to examine the main characteristics of this law, especially those that are different from the traditional Brazilian norms and seems to present weaknesses. It seeks to analyze whether the distinct rationality brought within the general scope of normative behavior is actually achieved in the law’s provisions. The methodology of the work is logic-deductive through examination of the law itself. The analysis is divided into three sections. First, the paper presents the context in which the law was promulgate, and sequentially, indicates the scope of the proscribed conduct and the judicial and administrative processes of punishment set forth the law. Further, the paper analyzes the doctrines of objective responsibility and the independence of transactions and occurrences. In addition, the paper critically examines the application of the law to foreign entities. The final section points out the important role that the Law has played spreading the culture of integrity, in an embryonic stage in connection with the law’s enactment. There are several shortcomings in the law, especially in the administrative procedural aspects and in the independence of instances, both of which should be considered and improved in this construction of new rationality.

  • A Momentary Glimpse of the Moon of the Bliss: A Conceptual Framework of Justice within the Semantic Tapestries of Legal Pluralism

    This paper examines the political-legal debates surrounding legal pluralism’s efficacy to counter injustice. Managing legal pluralism’s competing forces vis-à-vis a plurality-conscious framework has become increasingly challenging. Yet amidst unyielding state-centric etatism, reform-orientated activists yearn to glimpse the moon of bliss. This famous kahani (story) is simple: Little Krishna demands the moon as a toy. His mother, Yashoda, holds up a mirror so he sees the moon’s reflection in it and can play with it. Although pluralists yearn for the moon, the modalities and scope of legal pluralism, within the lacunae of international law, must be reassessed. Plurality-conscious justice is needed to overcome the myopia that has characterized complex legal landscapes, enabling pluralists to glimpse the moon of bliss, but never the full moon of justice.

  • Against Direct Presidential Election

Featured documents