South East Asian Journal of Advanced Law and Governance (SEAJ-ALGov)

Limitations in Applying State Recognition Theory to Post-Colonial States: The Case of Indonesia

2026-04-29T19:43:14+07:00

This research asserts limitations regarding the applicability of constitutive and declaratory statehood theory, as well as this theoretical dichotomy itself, to the realities of post-colonial states’ struggles for recognition. It selects Indonesia’s 1945-1950 struggle as its case study, which entails political discretion and the pursuit of legal statehood criteria – characteristic of constitutive and declaratory recognition theories respectively. It utilises historical and doctrinal methods, analysing legal texts, academic works on statehood recognition theory, and historical records for consistencies and discrepancies between the theories above and the timeline of Indonesia’s struggle for recognition. It finds that despite claiming to be dichotomous, evidence of both constitutive and declaratory statehood recognition theories are present in Indonesia’s case. Constitutive recognition theory is affirmed insofar as the Netherlands’ use of Eurocentric standards of civilisation to contest Indonesian statehood through invasions and diplomacy, and the US “big stick diplomacy” to coerce the Netherlands into recognising Indonesia. Yet, the same case also affirms declaratory recognition theory, including Indonesia’s pursuit of recognition from Arab League nations and implication as a state via admission into United Nations Security Council meetings. This research concludes Indonesia’s recognition struggle displays how the constitutive-declaratory dichotomy itself has limitations, as evidence of both theories "paradoxically" coexist and overlap. Indonesia’s case is one of a former colony’s struggle for statehood by any means, regardless of the theories it proves or disproves. It exemplifies how elements from both theories affected, or were strategically employed as legal-diplomatic leverage towards and against a country’s recognition.

The Eroding Legislative Oversight: The Governance Implications of State Asset Transfers Under Indonesia’s National Capital Law

2026-05-04T14:17:46+07:00

The enactment of Law Number 3 of 2022 concerning the National Capital (IKN Law) introduced fundamental changes to the legal framework governing state financial management in Indonesia, particularly regarding the authority over the transfer of state-owned assets (Barang Milik Negara, BMN). One of the most significant changes is the elimination of the requirement for prior approval by the House of Representatives (DPR) in asset transfer decisions, which had previously functioned as a key legislative check on executive financial decisions. This paper employs normative legal research through doctrinal and statutory analysis to examine the legal shift in DPR’s authority and its broader implications. The findings reveal that the shift reflects a strategic policy move to facilitate asset-based financing for the accelerated development of Indonesia’s new capital city, designated as a super-priority national project. The government aims to optimize BMN utilization for infrastructure financing by simplifying the approval process. Nevertheless, this regulatory change raises critical legal concerns. First, it generates normative tension between the IKN Law and existing statutory regimes, notably the State Treasury Law. Second, it reduces institutional oversight, potentially undermining transparency and public accountability in BMN transfers. Third, revenues from asset transfers are not automatically earmarked for the National Capital project but remain subject to the state budget allocation process, thus introducing fiscal uncertainty.

Harmonization of Asset Valuation Laws in ASEAN Member States: A Comparative Legal Analysis of Regulatory Divergence and Convergence

2026-04-29T16:14:24+07:00

This article examines the challenges of harmonizing asset valuation laws across ASEAN member states amid increasing regional economic integration. Despite the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community, regulatory fragmentation in asset valuation continues to create legal uncertainty for cross-border transactions. This study assesses whether legal harmonization in asset valuation within ASEAN is necessary and practically achievable by adopting a comparative doctrinal legal methodology, analyzing statutory frameworks and regulatory practices in selected ASEAN jurisdictions, including Singapore, Vietnam, and Indonesia. The analysis focuses on three dimensions: valuation standards, regulatory governance, and enforcement mechanisms. The findings reveal significant divergences across member states, particularly in the absence of unified valuation standards, varying institutional capacities, and inconsistent regulatory enforcement. These challenges hinder effective legal harmonization and limit the efficiency of regional financial integration. The article argues that a hybrid harmonization model—combining regional soft-law coordination with gradual domestic legal alignment—offers a more feasible pathway for ASEAN. This approach provides practical policy implications for strengthening regulatory coordination, enhancing legal certainty, and facilitating cross-border transactions. This study contributes to the literature by reframing asset valuation not merely as a technical issue but as a core regulatory challenge in ASEAN legal integration.

Freedom of Speech in Post-Reform Indonesia: A Lawfare Perspective

2026-04-29T19:47:04+07:00

This paper examines the use of lawfare as a mode of governance affecting freedom of speech in post-Reformasi Indonesia. While constitutional amendments to the 1945 Constitution formally entrenched freedom of speech, legal mechanisms have increasingly been mobilized to regulate, discipline, and suppress both political and social expression. Drawing on doctrinal legal analysis and political–institutional theory, the article argues that lawfare in Indonesia operates not primarily through overt censorship, but through strategic deployment of criminal, civil, and administrative law, particularly under the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, defamation provisions, and blasphemy regulations. Through analysis of prominent cases such as Deddy Febrianto Holo and Daniel Tangkilisa, Newmont Nusa Tenggara, Riau Andalan Pulp and Paper (RAPP) v. Tempo, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, alongside Constitutional Court jurisprudence on freedom of speech, the article demonstrates how complaint-driven prosecutions, prosecutorial discretion, and judicial restraint collectively produce a chilling effects on journalists, activists, academics, and political opponents. These practices blur the boundary between legitimate regulation and political repression, embedding coercion within formally lawful processes. The article contributes to Southeast Asian governance scholarship by conceptualizing Indonesian lawfare as a form of legal–institutional power that reshapes democratic contestation while maintaining constitutional legality. It concludes by outlining normative criteria and institutional reforms to reconcile Pancasila-based public order with meaningful protection of freedom of speech.

Land Acquisition Dispute in a National Strategic Project: the Case of Yogyakarta International Airport

2026-05-18T08:31:45+07:00

This study analyzes the dynamics of land acquisition disputes to provide land for the construction of the so-called national strategic project, namely, the Yogyakarta International Airport (YIA). It also discusses the ratio decidendi of the administrative court at first instance and cassation levels, particularly in the context of legality and substantive justice. Previous studies have highlighted the role of the administrative court in land disputes, but few have examined changes in judges' opinions across levels. The object of examination is the Location Determination Permit (Izin Penetapan Lokasi, IPL) issued by the Governor. The first-instance court revoked the permit, but the Supreme Court overturned that decision. The results of the study show the importance of checks and balances mechanisms, transparency in public consultation, and active community participation in the development process. This study makes a new contribution by highlighting the integration of substantive justice into the practice of administrative justice, enabling national strategic projects to be carried out without sacrificing the rights and welfare of the community.