Public Information Disclosure in the Process of Providing Legal Considerations by the Attorney General's Office: A Legal Comparison Between Indonesia and India

Public information disclosure is a fundamental aspect of good governance, ensuring transparency, accountability, and public participation in governmental decision-making. This study examines the provision of legal considerations by the Attorney General's Office in Indonesia within the framework of public information disclosure as mandated by Law Number 14 of 2008 on Public Information Disclosure (UU KIP). Using a comparative legal approach, this research analyzes the Right to Information Act 2005 (RTI Act 2005) of India as a reference for optimizing Indonesia's legal framework on transparency in prosecutorial legal considerations. The study applies Max Weber's bureaucratic authority theory, which emphasizes the importance of legal-rational authority in modern governance, and John Locke's legitimacy theory, which asserts that state power derives its legitimacy from public consent through transparency. Findings reveal that while UU KIP mandates the disclosure of public information, inconsistencies arise due to internal prosecutorial regulations, such as Regulation of the Attorney General's Office Number 7 of 2021, which classifies legal considerations as confidential. In contrast, India's RTI Act 2005 provides a clear procedural mechanism for public access to legal considerations, including independent oversight bodies and legal sanctions for non-compliance. The study concludes that Indonesia can improve transparency in the Attorney General's Office by adopting India's procedural mechanisms, strengthening oversight institutions, and enforcing sanctions for information withholding. These measures would enhance public trust, legal accountability, and democratic governance in Indonesia.