Bank Indonesia created an appropriate regulatory regime to drive the pace of innovation carried out by Financial Technology Providers while still applying the principles of consumer protection, risk management and prudence. One of the efforts made by Bank Indonesia was by issuing provisions concerning a regulatory sandbox for Financial Technology Providers along with their products, services, technology and/or business models in a Board of Governors Member Regulation No 19/14/PADG/2017 on the Limited Technology Testing Room (Regulatory Sandbox) Financial Technology. Meanwhile, the Financial Services Authority also issued regulation regarding the Regulatory Sandbox for Financial Technology Organizers in Financial Services Authority Regulation No. 13 / POJK.02/2018 on the Digital Financial Innovations in the Financial Services Sector. The main point of view to be analysed is the existence of regulatory sandbox approach held by Bank Indonesia and the Financial Services Authority as an effort to encourage the growth of Financial Technology in Indonesia.

Corruption is an extraordinary crime, so the law enforcement for corruption cases must also be done extraordinarily. Therefore

Replacement of colonial law was committed by Indonesia since the first, but fact there are still lot of colonial law have a status as positive law. The problems, what is the problematic causing factors of replacement colonial law with national law and how the politics of law response its problematics? The results of the study describe that the causing factors consist of (a) the heterogeneity of Indonesian nation, (b) embrace the principle of unification and codification; (c) differences in views on human rights. While, the politics of law formed as guidance for the colonial laws which are difficult to change such the law that relating to social life, cultural and spiritual. In other case, the field of "neutral" law such contract law and in the field of commercial law changing by renewal or creation the law. Keywords: Problems, colonial, national, politics of law

Monitoring and observation of court decisions made by judges is a new institution in the criminal procedural law in Indonesia. Through monitoring and observation of expected gaps (gap) between what the judge decided and reality implementation of the criminal in prison can be bridged. Judges will be brought closer to the prosecutors and corrections officials so that judges can follow the development of the state of the convict. Keywords: Judge, Supervisor and Observer, the Criminal Justice System

The urgency for criminal justice system reconstruction of the corruption is given the legal gap in eradicating corruption law if it is only carried out by the Regional Corruption Court, which is domiciled in the Capital Province. Because the Corruption Court’s working area is so broad, it is because many corruption cases to be tried, it will also require large fees and a large number of judges, and ideally, it will take a long time in the process of examining. Meanwhile, on the other hand, there is an obligation for the corruption case settlement by the Corruption Court to be carried out quickly, simply and at low cost. This paper’s problems are: (a) Why is it important to reconstruct the Corruption Criminal Justice System? (b) What is the ideal construction of the Corruption Criminal Justice System to support national development in Indonesia? The research method is qualitative with juridical normative and sociological approaches, especially in collecting primary data to reconstruct the corruption criminal justice system. This research shows that the ideal construction of the corruption court system is to support National Development, namely the relative competence of the Regional Corruption Court, which is not limited by the administrative area of a province. The Republic of Indonesia’s administrative area consists of various Provinces and Regencies/Cities. In these conditions, ideally, the relative competence of a Corruption Court can also examine corruption cases in districts/cities close to the Corruption Court, even though they are located in a different province from the domicile of a Corruption Court.