The persistence of absentee land ownership underscores a critical challenge in Indonesia’s agrarian system. The research aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the legal prohibition on absentee land ownership in Sawarna Village and its implications for the rights and welfare of local farmers. Utilizing an empirical juridical approach with a structural approach, the study collects primary data through interviews with key stakeholders, including local farmers, community leaders, and officials from the National Land Agency. The findings reveal that absentee land ownership in Sawarna Village persists due to weak enforcement of agrarian laws, economic vulnerability of local farmers, and speculative land acquisitions by external investors. These practices have reduced agricultural land availability, marginalized local farmers, and disrupted community cohesion. Furthermore, the study highlights gaps in institutional coordination and limited community involvement in land governance, which exacerbate the problem. This research underscores the need for stronger legal enforcement, community empowerment, and collaborative policy reform to ensure sustainable and equitable land use in rural areas. By addressing absentee land ownership, the government can advance the principles of agrarian reform and foster inclusive economic development.

In upholding the principle of consumerism, which illustrates the desire to protect or promote the interest of consumers, there is the likelihood that within standard form contracts, the consumer is at a weaker position in terms of bargaining strength and prospects of safeguarding their rights under such contracts. Standard agreements are generally considered to be contracts of adhesion where one party drafts the entire contract and the other party merely accepts or confirms what has been arrived at by the other party. Thus, the aim of this paper is to show how the rights of consumers are sometimes violated with the prevalence of standard form contracts/standard agreements. In achieving the said objective, the content analysis approach was adopted. Our findings reveal that consumers are sometimes at risk when concluding standard agreements with sellers or service providers, since they are hardly conversant with the terms of the contract and given that they have little or no means to make propositions therein before accepting. This gives a lee-way for some authors of such contracts to defraud consumers through the use of excluding and limiting terms. This is mostly compounded by the fact that there is often little or no time given to consumers to acquaint themselves with the terms before contracting. It is therefore submitted inter alia that consumers should be given the latitude or reasonable time to properly read through or get conversant with the terms of these agreements before expressing consent to them.

International humanitarian law and international human rights law are two distinct but complementary bodies of law. They are both concerned with the protection of the life, health and dignity of individuals. IHL applies in armed conflict while human rights law applies at all times, in peace and in war. The interplay between human rights and humanitarian law in armed conflict remains a critical area of legal and ethical discourse. While international humanitarian law (IHL) governs the conduct of hostilities, human rights law ensures fundamental freedoms and protections even in war. This article examines the practical challenges in implementing these legal frameworks, the role of state and non-state actors, and mechanisms for enforcement and accountability. Through an analytical approach, the study evaluates case studies from recent conflicts to assess the effectiveness of international legal instruments.