Illiberal tendencies in Indonesian legislation: the case of the omnibus law on job creation

Saru Arifin
{"title":"Illiberal tendencies in Indonesian legislation: the case of the omnibus law on job creation","authors":"Saru Arifin","doi":"10.1080/20508840.2021.1942374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT For the first time in the country’s legislative history, the Indonesian Parliament passed an omnibus law on job creation. By incorporating multiple statutory provisions from different types of law into a single Act, the omnibus law heralded a new age of Indonesian legislation. The legislation model of the omnibus bill, on the other hand, has been heavily criticised, with venues including marches, demonstrations, social media messages, and academic discussion forums. The government’s new omnibus bill format for the Job Creation Law, according to this article, endangers Indonesia’s parliamentary democracy by tilting it toward illiberalism. In illiberal democracies, public engagement is often ignored. Parliament does not have enough time to discuss the substance of Articles because they are lengthy and time-limited. An omnibus legislation, on the other hand, takes longer to complete due to the increased number of content rules. Consequently, rather than satisfying public expectations, the government’s policy has been distilled into the omnibus bill plan. Meanwhile, the omnibus bill has thrust society to the forefront of the legislative agenda. To be completely frank, the efficacy and effectiveness with which legislative laws convey people’s desires dictates the quality of legislation. As a result, this article proposes amending the legislation governing legal development by introducing an omnibus law model appropriate for Indonesia’s legal democracy.","PeriodicalId":42455,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942374","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942374","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

ABSTRACT For the first time in the country’s legislative history, the Indonesian Parliament passed an omnibus law on job creation. By incorporating multiple statutory provisions from different types of law into a single Act, the omnibus law heralded a new age of Indonesian legislation. The legislation model of the omnibus bill, on the other hand, has been heavily criticised, with venues including marches, demonstrations, social media messages, and academic discussion forums. The government’s new omnibus bill format for the Job Creation Law, according to this article, endangers Indonesia’s parliamentary democracy by tilting it toward illiberalism. In illiberal democracies, public engagement is often ignored. Parliament does not have enough time to discuss the substance of Articles because they are lengthy and time-limited. An omnibus legislation, on the other hand, takes longer to complete due to the increased number of content rules. Consequently, rather than satisfying public expectations, the government’s policy has been distilled into the omnibus bill plan. Meanwhile, the omnibus bill has thrust society to the forefront of the legislative agenda. To be completely frank, the efficacy and effectiveness with which legislative laws convey people’s desires dictates the quality of legislation. As a result, this article proposes amending the legislation governing legal development by introducing an omnibus law model appropriate for Indonesia’s legal democracy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
印度尼西亚立法中的不自由倾向:以创造就业综合法为例
摘要印尼议会通过了一项关于创造就业的综合性法律,这是该国立法史上的第一次。通过将不同类型法律的多个法定条款纳入一项法案,综合法律预示着印尼立法的新时代。另一方面,综合法案的立法模式受到了严厉批评,其场所包括游行、示威、社交媒体信息和学术讨论论坛。根据这篇文章,政府为《创造就业法》制定的新的综合法案格式,使印度尼西亚的议会民主倾向于非自由主义,从而危及议会民主。在不自由的民主国家,公众参与往往被忽视。议会没有足够的时间讨论条款的实质内容,因为这些条款冗长且时间有限。另一方面,由于内容规则的数量增加,综合立法需要更长的时间才能完成。因此,政府的政策非但没有满足公众的期望,反而被提炼成了综合法案计划。与此同时,综合法案将社会推到了立法议程的首位。坦率地说,立法法律传达人民愿望的效力和有效性决定了立法的质量。因此,本文建议通过引入适合印度尼西亚法律民主的综合法律模式来修改法律发展立法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Theory and Practice of Legislation aims to offer an international and interdisciplinary forum for the examination of legislation. The focus of the journal, which succeeds the former title Legisprudence, remains with legislation in its broadest sense. Legislation is seen as both process and product, reflection of theoretical assumptions and a skill. The journal addresses formal legislation, and its alternatives (such as covenants, regulation by non-state actors etc.). The editors welcome articles on systematic (as opposed to historical) issues, including drafting techniques, the introduction of open standards, evidence-based drafting, pre- and post-legislative scrutiny for effectiveness and efficiency, the utility and necessity of codification, IT in legislation, the legitimacy of legislation in view of fundamental principles and rights, law and language, and the link between legislator and judge. Comparative and interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged. But dogmatic descriptions of positive law are outside the scope of the journal. The journal offers a combination of themed issues and general issues. All articles are submitted to double blind review.
期刊最新文献
Regulatory capture in energy sector: evidence from Indonesia Operationalisation of legislation and the will of legislators in the judgments of international courts of war crimes and post-war recovery Observing law-making patterns in times of crisis Exploring the relationship between law and governance: a proposal Governing during the COVID-19 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1