Reumi, Frans. “Special Autonomy and the Principles of Federal System: A
Blurred Portrait of the Special Autonomy for Papua." Hasanuddin Law Review
9, no. 1 (2023): 126-138. DOI: 10.20956/halrev.v9i1.4289

HasanuddinLawReview
Volume 9 Issue 1, April 2023
P-ISSN: 2442-9880, E-ISSN: 2442-9899
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Special Autonomy and the Principles of Federal System:
A Blurred Portrait of the Special Autonomy for Papua
Frans Reumi
Faculty of Law, Cenderawasih University, Papua, Indonesia. E-mail: fransreumi@yahoo.com

Abstract: The spirit of implementing decentralization and special autonomy contains the principle

of federal arrangements is the right solution in the Indonesian government system. A unitary
state in the form of a Republic with social conditions, multicultural society, and geographical
conditions with thousands of islands is a challenge in realizing prosperity. This article is normativelegal research. The data used are primary legal materials obtained from relevant regulations and
secondary legal materials obtained from various related literatures. The result shows that
implementing the principle of the reserve of powers was to the region and direct election system
for regional heads and deputy regional heads. Meanwhile, decentralization which leads to a
federal system, has positive and negative effects on the implementation of the functions and
objectives of the state, stated in the spirit of special autonomy. Both de facto and de jure, this
legal policy reflects the principle of the federal system, which aims to maintain the integrity of
the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.
Keywords: Federal System; Local Government; Papua; Regional Autonomy; Special Autonomy

1. Introduction
Indonesia is a unitary state with some federal arrangements becomes a basis for
implementing regional autonomy and special autonomy in Indonesia.1 Recently, the issue
of regional autonomy in the administration of regional government among others is the
emergence of debates regarding the implementation of decentralization in several
regions that have received special autonomy in Indonesia. All of these issues come from
the problems in the distribution of authority from the central government to the regions.
The imbalance and inequality of development is an important issue. Unequal
development has caused injustice to the multicultural Indonesian society in various
regions.

1 Rahmatunnisa, Mudiyati, Reginawanti Hindersah, and Tri Hanggono Achmad. "Why Regions with

Archipelagic Characteristics in Indonesia Also Need Asymmetric Decentralization?" Jurnal Bina Praja:
Journal of Home Affairs Governance 10, no. 2 (2018): 251-261.

126

Hasanuddin Law Rev. 9(1): 126-138

The development of constitutional law politics with the momentum of the fall of the New
Order government in 1998 was used by the reform movement in several regions to roll
out various demands, ranging from requests for wider autonomy, implementation of a
federal system to demands for separation from the Indonesian government. The
demands of several regions that were rolling out during the reform momentum, such as
the Province of Irian (now Papua), Daerah Istimewa Aceh, and Riau demanded separation
from Indonesia while the Province of East Kalimantan demanded the implementation of
a federal system.2
In Indonesia, the policy of decentralization leads to a federal system. This is also reflected
in the regional head and deputy regional head system elections regulated in the regional
government laws. This direct election system is commonly used in countries that adopt a
federation or pure federal system, including the United States, Australia and Canada.3
Another critical response, termed this direct election as most concrete example to
explain the view of decentralization policy in Indonesia in implementing the federal
arrangements system. The spirit of decentralization which contains federal arrangements
is the right way to be carried out by the Government of the Republic of Indonesia in
organizing a democratic government. Differences in understanding and emergence of
various conflicts of interest between the central government and regional governments,
between a local government and society are a process of adaptation in the democratic
process in Indonesia.
Until now, in developments after almost 23 years, the spirit of implementing the special
autonomy law for the Provinces of Papua and West Papua has changed, that the
proposed changes to the special autonomy law of Papua “can be” 4 submitted by the
people of Papua province. However, in practice, this provision was not implemented in a
participatory manner by involving the Papuan People’s Council (MRP – Majelis Rakyat
Papua) as the cultural representation institution for Indigenous Papuans. The term “the
implementation of this law is evaluated every year and for the first time it is carried out
at the end of the third year after this Law comes into effect,” also not consistently
implemented. Does not involve the Papuan People’ Council as the cultural representation
institution of Indigenous Papuans in fulfilling the principle of participation in the

2

Trabani Rab, 2002, “Kemerdekaan, Otonomi, atau Negara Federal: Suara Rakyat Daerah”, in Ikrar
Nusa Bhakti and Irine H. Gayatri (eds), Kontroversi Negara Federal: Mencari Bentuk Negara Ideal Indonesia
Masa Depan, (Bandung: Mizan Media Utama, 2002), p. 175
3
Peer, Gazala, and Javedur Rahman. "An unpleasant autonomy: Revisiting the special status for
Jammu and Kashmir." Economic and Political Weekly (2012): 72-75.
4
The term “can be” can exist and not exist, it is not a mandatory word in writing legal norms in the
formation of statutory regulations. This means that the authority remains in the hands of the government
according to the formulation of the law and the mandate in Article 7 paragraph (1) of Act No. 12 of 2011
concerning the establishment of legislation.

127

P-ISSN: 2442-9880, E-ISSN: 2442-9899

formation of Act No. 2 of 2021 concerning Special Autonomy for the Provinces of Papua
and West Papua.

2. The Spirit of Implementing Special Autonomy for Papua Reflects the
Principles of the Federal System
In the theory of government, normatively, there are two models of state formation,
namely the federal state and the unitary state. Etymologically, the word federal comes
from the Latin feodus, which means league. The league of autonomous city-states in
ancient Greece can be seen as the first federal state. The federal form of government is
derived from the constitutional experience of the United States. Starting from the
understanding of regeringsvorm that translated as a form of government and staatsvorm
is defined as a form of state, which can be divided into a united states and a unitary state.
The structure of the state is in the form of a union and there is also a form of unity. 5 The
state, in terms of its structure produces two possible forms of state structure, namely a
single-composed state, which is called a unitary state, and a pluralistic state, which is
called a federal state.
A positive side of a federal state concept include: Firstly, federalization is the most
appropriate strategy to open up powers that were previously very closed. Society
generally wants openness, many mechanisms and democratic institutions have been
developed in order to open up power, for example political representation. Secondly,
federalism is seen as an attempt to balance regional, ethnic or ethnic cultural strengths
within a country. Thirdly, in the federal system there are elements that can help avoid the
trend toward intensification of economic inequality and the accompanying political and
cultural conflicts. Fourthly is an alternative option to solve the problem of national
disintegration.
In addition to the positive side that is owned in the implementation of a federal state,
there is also a negative side or even the fundamental weakness of a federal state system,
namely providing opportunities for all provinces as autonomous regions to enjoy the
results of regional natural resources without the protection of financial balancing laws.
Under such conditions, it will create jealousy and gaps between areas rich in agricultural
products and areas that are dry or poor. Hence, in practice, it turns out that the federal
state system must also be seen as an imperfect system in solving various problems faced
by a country.

5

Sung, Ming-Hsi, and Hary Abdul Hakim. "Unitary, Federalized, or Decentralized?: The Case Study of
Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta as the Special Autonomous Regions in Indonesia." Indonesian Comparative
Law Review 1, no. 2 (2019): 103-121.

128

Hasanuddin Law Rev. 9(1): 126-138

Meanwhile, according to CF Strong, the concept of a unitary state which is also known as
eenheidstaat, in terms of its structure is single, meaning that a unitary state is a country
that is not composed of various countries, but only consists of one country, so that there
are no countries within the country. Historically, as for the development of
decentralization in Indonesia is implied that apart from improving the implementation of
regional autonomy, the establishment of the three laws has also become a strategy for
the government to prevent or dampen various movements and demands in the regions
that have social, economic or political motives which lead to potential disintegration. 6
According to experts, the increase in the degree of decentralization is a form of a shift
from a unitary system to a federal state. This is in line with the fact that Indonesia is a
country in the form of a unitary state where the power is in the central government, but
the authority of the central government is determined by its limits.
Authority that is not stated in the constitution and law is defined as the authority
possessed by the regional government as a reserve of powers. With these constitutional
arrangements, it means that the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia is organized
by federal arrangements or arrangements with several federal principles. Dwi Andayani,
in his research concluded that there had been a metamorphosis from a unitary state to a
federal state.7 This metamorphosis is getting stronger with the granting of special
autonomy status to the provinces of Aceh Darussalam, Papua and West Papua.
The function of law enforcement in the concept of a rule of law plays an important role
because it is part of the process of national law activities. Law enforcement is an effort to
realize ideas about justice, legal certainty and social benefits to become reality. Law
enforcement is the process of making efforts to uphold or actually function legal norms
as a guideline for behavior in traffic or legal relations in the life of society and the state.
Viewed from the subject, law enforcement can be carried out by a broad subject and can
also be interpreted as an effort to enforce the law by the subject in a limited or narrow
sense. In a broad sense, the law enforcement process involves all legal subjects in every
legal relationship. Anyone who carries out normative rules or does something or does not
do something based on the norms of the applicable legal rules, it means enforcing the
rule of law. In a narrow sense, in terms of the subject, law enforcement is only interpreted
as an effort by certain law enforcement officials to guarantee and ensure that a rule of
law operates as it should. In ensuring the upholding of the law, if necessary, law
enforcement officials are permitted to use.

6

Bauw, Lily. "Special Autonomy of Papua: A Review from the Perspective of the Unitary State of the
Republic of Indonesia." Papua Law Journal 1, no. 1 (2018): 1-26.
7
Hendratno, Edie Toet. “Desentralisasi yang Mengarah ke Sistem Federal dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap
Pelaksanaan Fungsi Negara.” Indonesian J. Int'l L. 4 (2006): 319.

129

P-ISSN: 2442-9880, E-ISSN: 2442-9899

Customary law develops following the development of society and existing traditions.
Traditional law is essentially a precipitate of decency in a society whose truth gets
recognition in that society. In its development, the existence of indigenous peoples still
raises debates regarding their existence as customary law to regulate the daily activities
of the community and resolve problems that arise in customary law communities. This is
cannot be separated from the existence of legal rules made by bodies or institutions that
make laws and other statutory regulations.
The existence of this customary law has been officially recognized by the state but its use
is limited. Article 18B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution confirms that “the State
recognizes and respects the customary law community units with their traditional rights
as long as they are still alive and in accordance with the development of society and the
principles of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia,” which means that the state
recognizes the existence of customary law and its constitutional rights in Indonesian legal
system.8
At the legal dogmatic level, which theoretically correlates with legal theory, especially
positive law, customary criminal acts (customary criminal law) must be in the form of a
written formulation so that elements of customary criminal acts can be qualified as a
major prime. There are no provisions that provide limitations regarding criminal acts that
can be resolved through customary law. Likewise, there is no single provision that
provides firmness regarding the position of customary court decisions on criminal acts
that have been regulated through national law. In the dimension of legal theory,
customary criminal law is seen as a living law that exist in Indonesian society. Therefore,
in this dimension, customary criminal law in its implementation uses legal interpretation
in the form of sociological or teleological interpretation.
This portrait tends to lead to federalism, it’s just that the government does not openly or
shyly use the term state, the granting of special autonomy for Aceh, Papua and West
Papua has directly or indirectly led to the formation of states. This tendency has
strengthened with the existence of Helsinki’s Memorandum of Understanding for Aceh,
although this was not explicitly stated. Whereas in a federal system, the difference
between a federal state and a unitary state is determined by the degree of
decentralization and the difference between a unitary state is only the degree of
decentralization. Thus, the principle of the widest division of government affairs
describes decentralization leading to a federal state system.

8

Yunus, Ahsan. "Multilayered democracy in Papua: A comparison of “Noken” system and Electoral
College system in the United States." Hasanuddin Law Review 6, no. 3 (2020): 232-239. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v6i3.2892

130

Hasanuddin Law Rev. 9(1): 126-138

There is a spirit of implementing decentralization in the second amendment to Act No. 2
of 2021 concerning Special Autonomy for Papua, where authority is implemented
through the principle of decentralization which reflects that the federal system in
maintaining the integrity of the country has not changed. The Papua Province “can” have
a regional symbol as a banner of greatness and a cultural symbol for the grandeur of
Papuan identity in the form of a regional flag and regional anthem which are not
positioned as symbols of sovereignty.

3. The Spirit of Arrangement the Special Autonomy Law with the Principles
of a Federal State
3.1. The Special Autonomy Law for Province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam with the
Principle of Federal State
Decentralization through the Special Autonomy Law places special autonomy for
Province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, the implementation of which is proportionally
placed in districts and cities or other names, and regulated in regional regulations called
Qanun. Material content of Act No. 18 of 2001 concerning special autonomy for Province
of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, which shows similarities to the system of division of
governmental functions in a federal state, are:
Table 1. Characteristics of Federal State in the Special Autonomy Law for Province of Nanggroe
Aceh Darussalam
No

Material Content of the
Act No. 18 of 2001

Argumentation of Federalism

1

The authority to form a judiciary that is
free from the influence of any party, this
law gives pleasure to the Provincial
Government
of
Nanggroe
Aceh
Darussalam to form a judiciary that is free
from the influence of any party. This
provision shows that Province of
Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam has the same
authority and is actually the authority of
the Central Government, namely the
authority in the field of justice or judiciary.

The authority possessed by Province if
Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam can be said to be
the authority of a state or is the authority of a
federal state. This is an indication of the
existence of a state within a state.

2

Authority to determine regional flags, this
law gives authority to the Regional
Government of Province of Nanggroe
Aceh Darussalam to determine regional
flags.

This provision, although it does not reflect the
complete similarity with the flags of the states
in a federal state which shows its sovereignty,
nevertheless at least implies the principle of
the authority of the states in a federal country
in displaying symbols of sovereignty.

131

P-ISSN: 2442-9880, E-ISSN: 2442-9899

3

The authority to arrange levels of selfgovernment, this law gives authority to
Province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam to
arrange the levels of self-government.

Authority like this resembles the authority of
the state to organize the levels of state
government. To illustrate that this condition
reflects the similarity of characteristics with
the federal state system, by quoting the
opinion of R. Kranenburg who said that in a
union state, the states have the authority to
regulate their own form of state organization,
although it must still be within the limits
specified in the constitution of its federal.

5

The authority to form regional regulations
that can overrule other laws and
regulations, this law stipulates that
Province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam
has the authority to form Qanun namely
regional regulations that can overrule
other laws and regulations by following
the principle of “lex specialist derogat legi
generalists’.

The authority possessed by Province of
Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam implies a
similarity with the powers of the states to
form their own constitution. This similarity
can be explained by referring to R.
Kranenburg’s opinion that in a union state,
the state has the authority to make their own
constitution (pouvoir constituent), although it
still has to be within the limits specified in the
federal constitution.

6

Special authority regarding the regional
police, the law regulates the functional
duties of the police in the field of public
order and security is further regulated by
Qanun of Province of Nanggroe Aceh
Darussalam.

This provision shows a difference from the
coordination system of the national Police
which has so far been centralized both in
terms of structural and functional tasks.
Likewise with several other arrangements
related to the implementation of regional
police in Province of Nanggroe Aceh
Darussalam.

Source: Primary data, 2022 (edited).

After Act No. 11 of 2006 concerning the Government of Aceh, which has reflected a
special regional government related to one of the distinctive characteristics of the history
of the struggle of the Acehnese people who have high resilience and fighting power. This
means that the fighting power comes from a view of life that is based on a strong “Sharia
Islam” in defending the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.
3.2. The Special Autonomy Law for Papua with the Principle of Federal State
The implementation of decentralization through the second amendment of Act No. 2 of
2021 concerning the Special Autonomy of Papua gives special and broader authority to
Province of Papua. The state recognizes and respects special regional government units
regulated in law. Furthermore, in considering emphasized that national integration within
the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia must be maintained by respecting the
equality and diversity of the socio-cultural life of the Papuan people, through the
establishment of a special autonomous region.
132

Hasanuddin Law Rev. 9(1): 126-138

Table 2. Characteristics of the Federal State in the Special Autonomy Law of Papua
No
1

2

3

4

Material Content of
Act No. 2 of 2021
Authority to have a regional flag, this
law gives authority to the government
of Papua to have a regional flag. This
provision has similarities with the
Special Autonomy Law for Province of
Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, which also
gives the same authority to Nanggroe
Aceh Darussalam.
Delegating the reserve of powers to the
regional government, the law stipulates
that the authority of Province of Papua
includes authority in all areas of
government, except for the authority
that belongs to the central government
which has been determined based on
statutory regulations.
Authority to form special regional
regulations, this law gives authority to
the Province of Papua to form Special
Regional Regulations (Perdasus –
Peraturan Daerah Khusus)

Act No. 2 of 2021 concerning the
second amendment to Act No. 21 of
2001 concerning Special Autonomy for
the Provinces of Papua and West Papua.

Argumentation of Federalism
The authority to own this regional flag
although not completely resembling the
authority of the states to have their flag in the
federal state as symbols of their sovereignty,
at least implies the federal principle.

This provision is in line with the provisions
concerning the system of distribution of
governmental affairs which reflect similarities
with the system of delegation of the reserve
of powers in a federal state, as described
above. This provision indicates that the
reserve of powers to administer regional
administration is left to the province of Papua.
This authority implies the similarity of
characteristics with the authority of the states
in drafting their laws and regulations in a
federal state, as stated by R. Kranenburg who
said that in a union state, the states have the
authority to make a constitution even though
it still has to be within specified limits in its
federal constitution.
The second amendment to the Special
Autonomy Law of Papua in substance does
not change the principles of the federal
system, namely the reserve of powers to
administer regional government is handed
over to the Provinces of Papua and West
Papua on the principle of decentralization.

Source: Primary data, 2022 (edited).

4. Analysis of Applicability of the Federal Arrangements System in the
Regional Government System
Changes the Special Autonomy Law of Papua were initially the government only proposed
changes to three articles but then after a long meeting, there were additional 15 articles
outside the proposed substance, two additional articles of material substance outside the
changes to the Special Autonomy Law of Papua. Policies in the spirit of implementing
133

P-ISSN: 2442-9880, E-ISSN: 2442-9899

decentralization or the Special Autonomy Law of Papua, which lead to a federal system
have positive and negative effects on the implementation of state functions. 9

The positive effect of decentralization policies that lead to a federal system on the
implementation of state functions is an increase in democracy in the administration of
government, indicated by:
a. Granting broad authority to the regions to implement regional autonomy.
b. Strengthening the legitimacy of regional heads and deputy regional heads in the
eyes of the people.
c. Implementation of state functions that implement the principle of checks and
balances.
d. There is recognition of diversity in the life of the nation and state.
e. Increased regional independence in developing its territory and managing its
household.
f. The easing of demands and movements in the regions against the central
government.
The negative effect of the decentralization policy that leads to a federal system on the
implementation of state functions is the occurrence of several things that are not in line
with the ideals of granting special autonomy, including:
a. Increased regional government ego due to differences in understanding of broad
authority granting, resulting in authority conflicts between the central
government and regional governments.
b. Strengthening regional exclusivism or characteristics, even primordialism.
c. The emergence of excessive domination over territories and natural resources
that should be controlled by the state and used for the greatest prosperity of its
people.
d. There are widespread demands in several regions to obtain special autonomy
status, such as that which was granted to the Provinces of Nanggroe Aceh
Darussalam, Papua and West Papua.
The principle of the degree of decentralization largely and based on the principle of
broadest autonomy indicates that there is a process of democratization in the
administration of local government,10 which bears the character of the principles of
9

Bertrand, Jacques. "Indonesia's quasi-federalist approach: Accommodation amid strong
integrationist tendencies." International Journal of Constitutional Law 5, no. 4 (2007): 576-605; Verdier,
Pierre-Hugues, and Mila Versteeg. "International law in national legal systems: An empirical investigation."
American Journal of International Law 109, no. 3 (2015): 514-533.
10 Rolnik, Raquel. "Democracy on the edge: Limits and possibilities in the implementation of an urban
reform agenda in Brazil." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 35, no. 2 (2011): 239-255.

134

Hasanuddin Law Rev. 9(1): 126-138

federal arrangements, as well as several variables of democratic theory which are
reflected in the principles of implementing decentralization in the Special Autonomy Law
of Papua. The principle of a federal system is reflected in the spirit of the substance of
Act No. 21 of 2001 which shows similarities with the system of division of governmental
affairs in a federal state, including: the first is the authority to have its own regional flag
and the second is the authority to form people’s representative institutions, the third is
the authority to form special regional regulations.
Fulfillment of customary obligations for the settlement of customary cases in Papua is
constructive as well as a wise solution in overcoming the dualism of imposing criminal
sanctions experienced by perpetrators of criminal acts (convicts).11 In this regard, the
following is a table showing the views of respondents from the legislature, regional
government and law enforcement officials as well as members of indigenous peoples
regarding the existence of dualism in the handling of criminal acts in Papua.
Figure 1. Respondent's response to the dualism of the legal system in Papua
42

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

70%

60%
50%
23

40%
30%
20%
10%

Dualisme

Non-dualism

f

42

23

p

64%

36%
f

0%

p

Source: Primary data, 2022 (edited).

As figure 1 shows that there are 42 respondents or 64% of respondents who agree that
there is a dualism of the legal system in Papua on the grounds that crimes that have been
sentenced to customary punishments are still subject to imprisonment under state law.
The views of the respondents above indicate that there are differences of opinion among
the respondents in which some respondents are of the view that after the imposition of
customary crimes by the customary court, state law can no longer impose sanctions. On
the other hand, there are respondents who are of the view that the imposition of

11

Adinagoro, Budi Kasan Besari. "Restructurisation Special Autonomy Policy the Province Of Equity
Papua According To Indonesian Constitution." In Proceeding International Conference on Law, Economy,
Social and Sharia (ICLESS), vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 199-210. 2022.

135

P-ISSN: 2442-9880, E-ISSN: 2442-9899

customary crimes does not necessarily eliminate criminal acts that violate national law.
The researcher argues that the occurrence of this difference in views is due to the
absence of clear arrangements regarding criminal acts that can be resolved through
customary and non-criminal courts which can only be resolved by national law. In a
political constitutional perspective, there are two reasons why the decentralization policy
has led to a federal system, including: the first, the three laws are an attempt to maintain
the integrity of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia from the history of its
formation. The second is to realize equitable development and achieve people’s welfare.
Decentralization policies that lead to a federal system have positive and negative effects
on the implementation of state functions.12 The positive effect of the decentralization
policy that leads to a federal system on the implementation of state functions has been
an increase in the administration of government, which is indicated by the granting of
broad authority to the regions to implement regional autonomy, strengthening the
legitimacy of regional heads and deputy heads in the eyes of the people. There is
recognition of diversity in the life of the nation and state, increased regional
independence in developing their territory and managing their households, and the
easing of demands and movements in the regions against the central government.
On the other hand, like two sides of a coin, there is a negative effect of decentralization
policies that lead to a federal system on the implementation of the functions and goals
of the state. There are several things that are not in line with the spirit of special
autonomy for Papua. This is indicated by the increased ego of the regional government
due to differences in understanding of the broad authority granting, resulting in a conflict
of authority between the central and regional governments, strengthening regional
exclusivism or regional characteristics, even primordialism and the emergence of
excessive control over territories and natural resources that should be controlled by the
state and used for the maximum extent possible. It is undeniable that the government’s
unilateral policy towards the second amendment to the Special Autonomy Law of Papua
within the framework of implementing executive and legislative decentralization leads to
a federal system.

5. Conclusion
The arrangement of decentralization as an objective manifestation of the spirit of special
autonomy is an effort to realize equitable development and poverty alleviation in Papua.
Indonesia’s commitment to governance must be consistently maintained to defend the
sovereignty of the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia. Implementing the principle
12

Mehrotra, Santosh. "Governance and basic social services: ensuring accountability in service
delivery through deep democratic decentralization." Journal of International Development: The Journal of
the Development Studies Association 18, no. 2 (2006): 263-283.

136

Hasanuddin Law Rev. 9(1): 126-138

of the reserve of powers was to the region and direct election system for regional heads
and deputy regional heads. Meanwhile, decentralization which leads to a federal system,
has positive and negative effects on the implementation of the functions and objectives
of the state, stated in the spirit of special autonomy. Both de facto and de jure, this legal
policy reflects the principle of the federal system, which aims to maintain the integrity of
the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.

References
Adinagoro, Budi Kasan Besari. "Restructurisation Special Autonomy Policy the Province of
Equity Papua According To Indonesian Constitution." In Proceeding International
Conference on Law, Economy, Social and Sharia (ICLESS), vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 199210. 2022.
Bauw, Lily. "Special Autonomy of Papua: A Review from the Perspective of the Unitary
State of the Republic of Indonesia." Papua Law Journal 1, no. 1 (2018): 1-26.
Bertrand, Jacques. "Indonesia's quasi-federalist approach: Accommodation amid strong
integrationist tendencies." International Journal of Constitutional Law 5, no. 4
(2007): 576-605.
Bhakti, Ikrar Nusa and Irine H. Gayatri (eds), Kontroversi Negara Federal: Mencari Bentuk
Negara Ideal Indonesia Masa Depan, Bandung: Mizan Media Utama, 2002.
Hendratno, Edie Toet. “Desentralisasi yang Mengarah ke Sistem Federal dan
Pengaruhnya Terhadap Pelaksanaan Fungsi Negara.” Indonesian J. Int'l L. 4
(2006): 319.
Mehrotra, Santosh. "Governance and basic social services: ensuring accountability in
service delivery through deep democratic decentralization." Journal of
International Development: The Journal of the Development Studies Association
18, no. 2 (2006): 263-283.
Peer, Gazala, and Javedur Rahman. "An unpleasant autonomy: Revisiting the special
status for Jammu and Kashmir." Economic and Political Weekly (2012): 72-75.
Rahmatunnisa, Mudiyati, Reginawanti Hindersah, and Tri Hanggono Achmad. "Why
Regions with Archipelagic Characteristics in Indonesia Also Need Asymmetric
Decentralization?" Jurnal Bina Praja: Journal of Home Affairs Governance 10, no.
2 (2018): 251-261.
Rolnik, Raquel. "Democracy on the edge: Limits and possibilities in the implementation
of an urban reform agenda in Brazil." International Journal of Urban and Regional
Research 35, no. 2 (2011): 239-255.

137

P-ISSN: 2442-9880, E-ISSN: 2442-9899

Sung, Ming-Hsi, and Hary Abdul Hakim. "Unitary, Federalized, or Decentralized?: The Case
Study of Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta as the Special Autonomous Regions in
Indonesia." Indonesian Comparative Law Review 1, no. 2 (2019): 103-121.
Verdier, Pierre-Hugues, and Mila Versteeg. "International law in national legal systems:
An empirical investigation." American Journal of International Law 109, no. 3
(2015): 514-533.
Yunus, Ahsan. "Multilayered democracy in Papua: A comparison of “Noken” system and
Electoral College system in the United States." Hasanuddin Law Review 6, no. 3
(2020): 232-239. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v6i3.2892

138