A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE INDONESIAN AND PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEMS: IDENTIFYING THE ROLE OF CUSTOMARY COURTS

Customary dispute resolution institutions in Indonesia and the Philippines serve to provide indigenous peoples with access to justice beyond state courts. This research, employing a normative juridical approach with a descriptive-analytical specification, highlights key differences between the two systems. In Indonesia, customary courts derive recognition from the 1945 Constitution, while in the Philippines, they are explicitly regulated under the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997, leading to greater integration with the national legal system. Indonesian customary courts handle a broader range of disputes, whereas Philippine customary courts primarily focus on land rights and natural resource management. Additionally, Indonesian customary court decisions often face dualism in the application of customary and national law when reviewed by state courts, while Philippine customary court decisions are more systematically recognized and enforced within the formal legal framework.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cepalo
Published
2025-03-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25041/cepalo.v9no1.3677
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.52
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE INDONESIAN AND PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEMS: IDENTIFYING THE ROLE OF CUSTOMARY COURTS

Sonny Dewi Judiasih, Dewi Sulastri, Dede Kania, Hazar Kusmayanti
1 citations
Cepalo
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
8.52
article

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE INDONESIAN AND PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEMS: IDENTIFYING THE ROLE OF CUSTOMARY COURTS

Sonny Dewi Judiasih, Dewi Sulastri, Dede Kania, Hazar Kusmayanti
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Customary dispute resolution institutions in Indonesia and the Philippines serve to provide indigenous peoples with access to justice beyond state courts. This research, employing a normative juridical approach with a descriptive-analytical specification, highlights key differences between the two systems. In Indonesia, customary courts derive recognition from the 1945 Constitution, while in the Philippines, they are explicitly regulated under the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997, leading to greater integration with the national legal system. Indonesian customary courts handle a broader range of disputes, whereas Philippine customary courts primarily focus on land rights and natural resource management. Additionally, Indonesian customary court decisions often face dualism in the application of customary and national law when reviewed by state courts, while Philippine customary court decisions are more systematically recognized and enforced within the formal legal framework.

CepaloVol. 9(1)
Sunan Gunung Djati State Islamic University Bandung (ID), Padjadjaran University (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
8.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE INDONESIAN AND PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEMS: IDENTIFYING THE ROLE OF CUSTOMARY COURTS — Sonny Dewi Judiasih, Dewi Sulastri, et al. · Cepalo (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS