<div><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left"><tbody><tr><td align="left" valign="top"><p class="AbstractText">Indonesia has enacted mining law, environmental protection law, and a number of rules addressing mining and environmental issues. However, the establishment of these numerous laws and regulations has not resulted in a decline in corruption cases and environmental degradation. In fact, government officials are frequently lenient with mining industry owners who fail to follow good environmental standards. This is critical since Indonesia has spent the last two decades attempting to resolve corruption and environmental challenges. This study describes specific instances of mining and environmental law confusion resulting from corrupt activities. The study takes a normative legal approach. Resources have been gathered through examinations of mining and environmental laws and regulations, as well as reports by multiple authorities that track the same subject. The study demonstrates how prior Indonesian mining law policy acknowledged regional governments as mining authorities. The policy has caused widespread mining corruption, particularly in the area of business permits, involving regional political leaders and the private sector. The irresponsibility of regional political elites has jeopardized the environment and ecosystem. It is also an echo of overlapping legislation and authorities in the mining and environmental sectors.</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div>

Some twenty years ago, genocide was taking place just a one-hour flight from Brussels: assassination of a very different kind from that of 1914 enveloped Sarajevo. Bosnia (and the Union of different peoples-Yugoslavia) was being turned into a years-long slaughterhouse; meanwhile, the Maastricht dream was unifying the Westphalian world of the Old Continent. Two decades later, Atlantic Europe is a political powerhouse (with two of the three European nuclear powers and two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council), central Europe is an economic powerhouse, Russian-speaking Europe is an energy powerhouse, Scandinavian Europe is a bit of all that, and eastern Europe is none of it. As soon as serious security challenges emerge, the component parts of true, historic Europe resurface. Formerly in Iraq (with the exception of France) and now with Sudan, Mali and Syria, central Europe is hesitant to act, Atlantic Europe is eager, Scandinavian Europe is absent, eastern Europe is on a bandwagon and Russian-speaking Europe is in opposition. Did Europe change (after its own 11/9) or did it only become more itself?

The emergence of disruptive technologies has transformed how the conflict is resolved. If Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has been understood as a more efficient method of resolving dispute than through the court, then in line with the development of technologies, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) considered as the most efficient mechanism in ADR. Through ODR, access barriers are reduced, effectiveness increases, software becomes smarter and some ADR elements are challenged. This article focuses on the shifting of dispute resolution from the traditional approach to the new generation one which called digital justice.

On the eastern, ascendant flank of the Eurasian continent, the Chinese vertigo economy is overheated and too-well integrated in the petrodollar system. Beijing, presently, cannot contemplate or afford to allocate any resources in a search for an alternative. (The Sino economy is a low-wage-and labor intensive-centered one. Chinese revenues are heavily dependent on exports and Chinese reserves are predominantly a mix of the USD and US Treasury bonds.) To sustain itself as a single socio-political and formidably performing economic entity, the People's Republic requires more energy and less external dependency. Domestically, the demographic-migratory pressures are huge, regional demands are high, and expectations are brewing. Chine is a challenger that (for the time being) wishes to preserve the status quo, while the US is a status quo power that wants to challenge the system by decoupling. What will be the end game; yet another winner or a game-changer?

Does our history only appear overheated, while it is essentially calmly predetermined? Is it directional or conceivable, dialectic and eclectic or cyclical, and therefore cynical? Surely, our history warns (no matter if the Past is seen as a destination or resource). Does it also provide for a hope? Hence, what is in front of us: destiny or future? Theory loves to teach us that extensive debates on what kind of economic system is most conductive to human wellbeing is what consumed most of our civilizational vertical. However, our history has a different say: It seems that the manipulation of the global political economy (and usage of fear as the currency of control) – far more than the introduction of ideologies – is the dominant and arguably more durable way that human elites usually conspired to build or break civilizations, as planned projects.