Russian Law Journal

LAW ENFORCEMENT ON HEALTHCARE FRAUD: A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN INDONESIA AND EUROPE

AINUL LATHIF — 2026-01-06

Healthcare fraud poses a serious challenge to the financial integrity and ethical foundations of national health systems. This study examines the legal frameworks and enforcement mechanisms used to combat healthcare fraud in Indonesia and selected European countries—namely the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Germany. Using a normative and comparative legal research method, the study analyzes statutory provisions, institutional structures, and doctrinal development in each jurisdiction. Findings show that Indonesia's current approach is fragmented, relying on general criminal law and weak administrative regulations, without a clear legal definition of healthcare fraud. Institutional coordination is limited, enforcement data is not transparently reported, and courts have not developed jurisprudence tailored to the healthcare context. In contrast, the European countries studied have established specific legal definitions, dedicated enforcement bodies, and integrated systems that combine criminal, administrative, and civil measures. The study proposes a dual-path enforcement model for Indonesia, recommending legislative reform, procedural integration, specialized institutions, and enhanced judicial interpretation. This article addresses a clear research gap in Indonesian legal scholarship, where healthcare fraud has rarely been analyzed as a distinct legal category within health governance and criminal enforcement literature. By adopting lessons from the European experience, Indonesia can strengthen its legal response to healthcare fraud and protect the sustainability of its national health insurance system.

CRIMINALIZATION POLICY OF UNION BUSTING IN INDONESIA'S LABOR LAW: NORMATIVE GAPS, ENFORCEMENT FAILURES, AND COMPARATIVE LESSONS FOR REFORM

JIMBRIS JULIANTO MARUDDIN — 2026-01-12

Union busting represents a serious threat to labor democracy and fundamental rights in Indonesia. Although Law No. 21 of 2000 prohibits employer interference in trade union activities and provides for criminal sanctions, its enforcement has remained largely ineffective. This study investigates the normative and institutional failures underlying this gap and argues for the urgent need to establish a coherent criminal policy on union suppression. Using a normative-juridical method combined with comparative analysis, the article finds that Indonesia's current legal framework suffers from vague offense definitions, lack of evidentiary support structures, and fragmented enforcement mechanisms. Drawing on models from South Korea, Canada, and South Africa, the study proposes a reform blueprint including revised legal definitions, rebuttable presumptions, dual-track enforcement via administrative and criminal pathways, and proportional corporate sanctions. Criminalization is justified not only as a last resort but as a necessary response to systemic impunity and democratic erosion. The findings offer actionable recommendations for legal reform, institutional design, and policy alignment with international labor standards.

HARMONIZATION OF ELECTORAL NORMS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF CONSTITUTIONALISM AND DEMOCRATIC STRENGTHENING: A RESPONSE TO THE EVOLVING GLOBAL ELECTORAL LANDSCAPE

MAHRUS ALI — 2026-01-12

This article explores the challenges and prospects of harmonizing electoral norms across jurisdictions through the lens of constitutionalism and democratic resilience. Amidst rising global democratic backsliding, legal fragmentation, and transnational electoral threats—including disinformation, cross-border financing, and algorithmic manipulation—electoral systems are increasingly vulnerable. While international instruments such as the ICCPR and soft law frameworks provide normative guidance, their implementation remains inconsistent. This study adopts a normative-juridical and comparative constitutional methodology, drawing insights from Indonesia, Germany, South Africa, Kenya, India, and the European Union. The analysis is structured around three key questions: (1) how constitutional principles can underpin electoral harmonization, (2) the tensions between harmonization and state sovereignty, and (3) mechanisms for reconciling legal pluralism with global democratic standards. The article proposes a seven-pillar model of electoral norm convergence: constitutional entrenchment, institutional interoperability, codified soft law, judicial dialogue, overriding mandatory democratic principles, technological harmonization, and democratic pedagogy. It argues that harmonization must be pursued not through procedural uniformity but through constitutional alignment, respecting pluralistic expressions of democratic governance. The findings contribute both to democratic theory and to the development of normative frameworks for resilient, legitimate, and globally coherent electoral systems.

TRANSFER PRICING DISPUTES IN MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS: A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF INDONESIA’S APA AND MAP FRAMEWORK POST-BEPS

ZUDI PERMADI — 2026-01-12

The intensification of cross-border economic activities among multinational corporations (MNCs) has significantly increased the complexity and frequency of transfer pricing disputes. In response, Indonesia has adopted a series of legal and administrative reforms to enhance the certainty, fairness, and transparency of its dispute-resolution mechanisms, particularly through the implementation of Advance Pricing Agreements (APAs) and the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP). These reforms align with the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action Plan, especially Actions 8–10 on transfer pricing and Action 14 on improving dispute resolution. Despite such progress, Indonesia continues to face doctrinal ambiguities, institutional constraints, and compliance challenges that impede the effective operation of APA and MAP frameworks. This article conducts a legal analysis of Indonesia’s transfer pricing dispute-resolution regime in the post-BEPS era, evaluating its statutory design, administrative practice, and alignment with international standards. Using normative legal methodology complemented by comparative insights from OECD member jurisdictions, the study examines the substantive rules governing APAs and MAP, the procedural safeguards afforded to taxpayers, and the enforcement powers of the Directorate General of Taxes (DGT). The findings reveal structural issues, including limited taxpayer access, procedural delays, insufficient transparency, and discrepancies between domestic legal norms and treaty-based obligations. The article argues that Indonesia must strengthen legal certainty, institutional coordination, and adherence to international dispute-resolution commitments to achieve a more predictable and equitable taxation system. Building on comparative lessons, this study proposes a refined legal framework for APAs and MAP that enhances Indonesia’s compliance with global transfer pricing standards while promoting sustainable tax administration.