Dana Otonomi Khusus Aceh menjadi sumber korupsi terbesar yang mengantarkan para kepala daerah di Aceh ke dalam penjara. Fakta ini menimbulkan pertanyaan, bagaimana sistem pengawasan DOKA selama ini dilakukan dan apa dampakpaknya terhadap agenda pemberantasan korupsi? Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan sistem pengawasan DOKA dan dampaknya terhadap pemberantasan korupsi. Teori yang digunakan adalah teori Check and Balances dan teori Willingness & Oppurtunity. Penelitian ini tergolong ke dalam jenis penelitian kualitatif dengan teknik analisis deskriptif. Temuan utama dalam penelitian menunjukkan bahwa DOKA tidak diawasi secara serius. Hal ini dapat dilihat dengan belum adanya sistem pengawasan khusus dan tidak digunakannya sistem pengawasan yang berlaku secara umum terhadap DOKA. Selain itu belum ada juga lembaga khusus yang memantau proses perencanaan sampai pada tahap pelaksanaan DOKA. Sistem pengawasan semacam itu tidak berdampak bagi pemberantasan korupsi. Perlu perbaikan serius dan evaluasi menyeluruh terhadap penggunaan dan penyaluran DOKA demi terwujudnya kesejahteraan sosial di Aceh.

This article aims to explain how the principle of equality before the law in Aceh Qanun Number 6 of 2014 concerning the Jinayat Law is applied. As part of the Indonesian state, the application of Islamic law (especially in the jinayat) in Aceh should be in line with the characteristics of the rule of law, among which is the principle of equality before the law. Through the statute approach, it turns out that there is a disparity between the Qanun Jinayat Aceh and the regulations above, including the principle of equality before the law. Even though they have equaled men and women, the Qanun Jinayat Aceh clearly distinguishes people based on their religion. A person who is Muslim is obliged to submit to Qanun a quo while those who are not Muslim are in two choices: first, subject to Qanun because of the vacuum of national law; or second, choosing to submit to the Qanun because it is considered lighter than national law. This situation is discriminatory for Muslims on one hand, and unfair to non-Muslims on the other.

This article seeks to analize the pattern of relations and authority of election agencies in special autonomous regions in Indonesia. The difference in the pattern of relations between election agencies in the special sutonomy region coincided with the implementation of asymmetric decentralization policies in Indonesia. As a result, differences in authority and specificity that is owned by one region with other regions. Whereas the Indonesian constitution based on Article 22E paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia states that all regulations relating to the electoral institutions in Indonesia apply nationally. The research method used is normative and empirical. This study found similarities and differences in the pattern of relationships and authority of election agencies in the special sutonomy Region. The similarity is that the election agencies in this Special Autonomous Region has lost certain duties and authorities that affect the pattern of their relationship. The difference lies in the lost duties and authority. In DKI Jakarta, the duties and responsibilities of the election organizers in the Regency/City are only in the context of assisting the Election organizing tasks in the Province. The duties and authority of the election organizers in DIY are reduced in the case of the Governor General Election. While in Aceh, the task of supervision is divided between two organizing agencies, namely the Aceh Panwaslih and the Aceh Province Panwaslih. In the future, this pattern of relations and authority will become a source of conflict and dispute. While in Papua Province, the election organize did not hold general elections due to the implementation of the noken system in some of these areas.