Jurnal Dinamika Hukum

The title uses an effective sentence with a maximum of 15 words, and its substance explains the proposed idea or the specific issue being studied.

Authors need to fill in their identity, email, and affiliation. The most common mistake for authors is to fill in only one author in the metadata but the manuscript file fills in multiple authors

A brief summary of an article that provides an overview of the manuscript. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum requires the abstract to be written in 200–250 words, with its substance presented sequentially, covering the introduction, objectives, methods, results, conclusions, and suggestions. The abstract includes 3–5 keywords, which do not necessarily have to be taken from the title but should instead reflect the legal concepts used and the key terminologies that are dominantly repeated throughout the manuscript.

Organize this section in the following order:

• Introduction: An overview of the main issues addressed in the title.
• Definitions: Key definitions of terms used in the title.
• Social facts: A description of the social conditions of the problem, including a case summary if the paper uses a case approach.
• Novelty: The unique contribution of the paper compared to at least three other journal articles.
• Contribution: How the paper benefits the scholarly community, especially the international community.
• Objectives: The specific research problem addressed in the paper and at least two problems

The author restates the research objectives at the beginning of this section, followed by an explanation of the relevant approach used to achieve these objectives. Data must be presented in a specific and detailed manner, not merely by distinguishing between primary and secondary data, but also by specifying the exact data sources utilized. Primary data is obtained through interviews and observations, both of which must be explicitly described. In interviews, the author should identify the informants, clarify whether they were selected independently by the authors or assigned by their institution, indicate the date of the interview, and specify the topics discussed. Meanwhile, observations should include details regarding the location, time, subjects, and objects being observed. Secondary data consists of regulations, reports, statistics, and other references, all of which should be explained in detail, similar to primary data. The classification of data ultimately depends on the method chosen by the author but must adhere to established scientific principles. Additionally, the author should systematically explain the analytical methods used to process the collected data.

This section must contain at least two sub-discussions. Even if the manuscript addresses only a single issue, authors are required to elaborate on it within a minimum of two sub-discussions. However, this section may only be expanded to a maximum of three sub-discussions, as the editorial board does not permit further additions.

The editorial board strongly recommends that the first aspect to be discussed is the data or findings obtained by the authors. It is advisable to avoid a conceptual and philosophical introduction, as the editorial board believes that this may cause readers to lose interest and disengage from the substance of the discussion. Subsequently, the authors should analyze these findings using references, regulations, arguments, and other relevant sources. Ensure that all arguments are supported by references that justify them. Use primary references, such as journals and conference proceedings published within the last five years. The total number of primary references used throughout the manuscript must be at least 30, with the majority of them ideally concentrated in the discussion section.

If authors encounter difficulties in articulating their ideas, they are advised to follow a sequential explanatory model: first, summarizing the research findings; second, explaining why the data appears in its current form; third, discussing the implications of the data in social contexts; and finally, presenting any proposed ideas or solutions. There are no strict limitations on paragraph structuring, and variations are permitted. However, it is recommended that each paragraph consist of 5–7 sentences, with each paragraph covering a distinct topic. Excessive use of bullet points and numbering should be avoided, as it may diminish the substantive quality of the discussion and complicate the layout process during copy editing. Enhancing the number of references will strengthen the argumentation, while incorporating tables or figures can provide greater contextual clarity and reinforce the message being conveyed.

The first paragraph should not be indented, while all subsequent paragraphs must be indented. Additionally, the spacing before and after paragraphs should be set to 6pt. The conclusion should be written in two concise paragraphs. The first paragraph should summarize the conclusions for each topic, ideally addressing the reasoning behind the findings and the mechanisms through which the discussed issues influence the subject matter. This section should focus on explaining the why and how of the study's outcomes.

The second paragraph should present recommendations and acknowledge the study's limitations. The limitations section should provide the author's reflection on the weaknesses of the study, offering guidance to readers interested in exploring similar topics. If the author intends to enhance the recommendations, the study's limitations should be clearly outlined within the methodology section.

The manuscript must cite at least 30 journal references, with at least five originating from international journals (not from Indonesia) categorized as reputable international journals. According to the Ministry of Higher Education’s policy, reputable international journals are those indexed in Scopus or Web of Science.