ABSTRAK Artikel ini menganalis pembangunan hukum nasional religius yang kerap kali dipersoalkan dan menimbulkan konflik serta ketegangan dalam tatanan kehidupan masyarakat Indonesia. Hasil analisis menyimpulkan bahwa pembangunan hukum nasional yang religius di Indonesia adalah sebuah kewajaran dan keniscayaan, karena hukum yang baik harus didasarkan pada nilai-nilai, kenyataan, dan harapan masyarakat. Dengan Pancasila sebagai philosophische grondslag negara, maka dasar Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa menjadi acuan dalam pembangunan hukum nasional yang religius, baik dalam pembentukan hukum, pelayanan hukum maupun penegakan hukum. Namun demikian, penting untuk memperhatikan kemajemukan dan sensivitas dari asas dan kaidah keagamaan, sehingga diperlukan kehati-hatian, sikap saling menghormati, dan prinsip demokrasi dalam pembangunan hukum nasional yang religius. Selain itu, pembangunan hukum nasional yang religius kerap mendapat tantangan, yang dapat dilihat secara umum dari pembentukan hukum yang rendah kuantitas maupun kualitasnya, serta penegakan dan pelayanan hukum yang koruptif dan mengabaikan prinsip etis/moral sebagai nilai religius. Karena itu, diperlukan kesadaran etis dalam pembangunan hukum nasional yang religius, serta mengarahkannya dalam rangka mencapai Keadilan Sosial bagi seluruh rakyat Indonesia. Kata kunci: agama; nilai religius; pembangunan hukum.   ABSTRACT This article analyzes national religious law development, which is often questioned and causes conflict and tension in the Indonesian public order. The article conclude that Indonesia's national religious law development is ordinary and necessary because good law must be based on the community's values, reality, and expectations. With Pancasila as the philosophical foundation of the state, the basis of the Belief in the one and only God becomes a reference in the development of national religious law, both in the forming of law, legal services, and law enforcement. However, it is crucial to attend to the diversity and sensitivity of religious principles and norms so that caution, mutual respect, and democratic principles are needed to develop national religious law. Also, national religious law development often faces challenges, which can be seen in general from the making of laws that are low in quantity and quality and the enforcement and service of law that is corrupt and ignores ethical/moral principles as religious values. Therefore, ethical awareness is needed to develop national religious law and direct it to achieve Social Justice for all Indonesian people. Keywords: legal development; religion; religious value.

The existence and movement of diasporas across the world significantly challenge the existing legal norms on citizenship and migration. The responses from law-makers from the origin countries vary. Most European, Latin America and African countries adopt dual citizenship laws. However, most countries in Asia-Pacific region, including Indonesia, do not favour dual citizenship. This is mostly because of the ideological perception of citizenship. In this sense, many countries grant special status or schemes to their diaspora (neither citizens nor residents of the country) in the form of an external quasi-citizenship based on ethnic descent, called “ethnizenship” by Bauböck.This article, drawing on on-going research, compares the Indonesian experience with that of two other countries that have adopted quasi-citizenship schemes. India and South Korea have been chosen for comparison since both countries have particular statutes that recognise and regulate diaspora status. India created the Person of Indian Origin (PIO) card scheme in 1998 and Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) card scheme in 2003. These two schemes merged in 2015 into the Overseas Citizens of India Card Holder (OCC) scheme through the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2015. While India adopts a regulatory model of diaspora through a citizenship law regime, the South Korean experience showsa different attitude towards their diaspora. The Korean Government has refused the Korean diaspora’s proposal for dual citizenship and created a semi-citizenship called “Overseas Korean” status through immigration law. This article discusses the Indian and South Korean experiences dealing with their diaspora in order to propose a regulatory model for Indonesia’s diaspora.

No abstract

This article compares the asymmetric form of decentralization model in the Aceh, Indonesia, and in the Northern Ireland, the United Kingdom, towards the process of peacemaking. In general, the decentralization models in the two regions have almost similar backgrounds due to prolonged religious conflicts. However, the devolution model in Northern Ireland is far more complex than Aceh’s, and closely related to other countries, that affect the constitutional status of Northern Ireland in the future. This is different from the Aceh government, which since the Helsinki MoU has remained a part of the Indonesia’s unitary form. On the other hand, in terms of governmental matters, decentralization in Aceh reflects a reduction in their special authority, with a pattern of division of government functions that is almost similar to the division of functions in the ordinary regional government. It is in contrast to the affairs of Northern Ireland’s government concerning matters that are categorized traditionally as the exclusive affairs of the central government in a unitary state, such as security matters. This provides a lesson for Indonesia that the issue of federalism in Aceh is indisputable and the Northern Ireland case reinforces the insight that federal state and unitary state have some degrees of similarity.

Kewenangan daerah untuk mengatur urusan rumah tangganya melalui Peraturan Daerah (Perda) menimbulkan persoalan tersendiri bila dikaitkan dengan harmonisasi terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan yang berada di atasnya maupun yang sejajar bahkan tidak jarang bertentangan dengan peraturan selevel undang-undang. Hal ini sering kali menjadi kendala dalam pembangunan nasional dalam kerangka Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia, lemahnya pengawasan pemerintah pusat dalam proses pembentukan suatu perda merupakan salah satu indikator mengapa kerap terjadi tumpang tindih antara perda terhadap peraturan yang berada di atasnya. Faktor penyebab disharmonisasi hukum dalam pembentukan peraturan daerah dapat berasal dari internal dan eksternal lembaga pembentuk peraturan daerah, dimana penanggulangannya dapat dilakukan melalui internal dan eksternal. Penanggulangan tersebut menjadi tanggung jawab semua tingkat pemerintahan negara baik oleh pemerintahan pusat provinsi sehingga tujuan terbentuknya peraturan daerah yang baik dan benar yang sesuai dengan peraturan perundang undangan dan kebutuhan masyarakat daerah dapat dapat dilaksanakan.