Mainstreaming Justice in the Establishment of Laws and Regulations Process: Comparing Case in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Australia

Q3 Social Sciences
Rodiyah Rodiyah, S. H. Idris, Robert B. Smith
{"title":"Mainstreaming Justice in the Establishment of Laws and Regulations Process: Comparing Case in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Australia","authors":"Rodiyah Rodiyah, S. H. Idris, Robert B. Smith","doi":"10.15294/jils.v7i2.60096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper compares the cases of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Australia to examine how these countries incorporate principles of justice in the establishment of laws and regulations. It explores the significance of mainstreaming justice in lawmaking, emphasizing equitable representation, fair access to justice, and human rights considerations. The analysis highlights the legal frameworks and institutional structures in each country. In Indonesia, the role of the Constitutional Court and stakeholder involvement in the legislative process are examined. Malaysia's constitutional framework and efforts to address ethnic and religious diversity, as well as the role of judicial review, are discussed. Australia's common law system emphasizes parliamentary scrutiny, public consultations, and protection of individual rights through the High Court and parliamentary committees. This study provides insights into the diverse approaches and challenges faced by these countries in mainstreaming justice in their lawmaking processes. It contributes to understanding how justice can be effectively integrated into laws and regulations, offering valuable insights for policymakers and legal practitioners seeking to promote justice in legislative contexts.","PeriodicalId":32877,"journal":{"name":"JILS Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JILS Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.v7i2.60096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This paper compares the cases of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Australia to examine how these countries incorporate principles of justice in the establishment of laws and regulations. It explores the significance of mainstreaming justice in lawmaking, emphasizing equitable representation, fair access to justice, and human rights considerations. The analysis highlights the legal frameworks and institutional structures in each country. In Indonesia, the role of the Constitutional Court and stakeholder involvement in the legislative process are examined. Malaysia's constitutional framework and efforts to address ethnic and religious diversity, as well as the role of judicial review, are discussed. Australia's common law system emphasizes parliamentary scrutiny, public consultations, and protection of individual rights through the High Court and parliamentary committees. This study provides insights into the diverse approaches and challenges faced by these countries in mainstreaming justice in their lawmaking processes. It contributes to understanding how justice can be effectively integrated into laws and regulations, offering valuable insights for policymakers and legal practitioners seeking to promote justice in legislative contexts.
法律法规制定过程中的正义主流化:比较印度尼西亚、马来西亚和澳大利亚的案例
本文比较了印度尼西亚、马来西亚和澳大利亚的案例,考察了这些国家在制定法律法规时如何将正义原则纳入其中。它探讨了在立法中将正义主流化的重要性,强调公平代表权、公平诉诸司法和人权考虑。该分析强调了每个国家的法律框架和体制结构。在印度尼西亚,审查了宪法法院的作用和利益攸关方在立法过程中的参与。讨论了马来西亚的宪法框架和解决种族和宗教多样性的努力,以及司法审查的作用。澳大利亚的普通法制度强调议会审查、公众咨询以及通过高等法院和议会委员会保护个人权利。本研究深入了解了这些国家在立法过程中将司法纳入主流方面所采取的不同方法和面临的挑战。它有助于理解如何将司法有效地纳入法律法规,为寻求在立法背景下促进司法的政策制定者和法律从业人员提供宝贵的见解。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信