ICDNR 2025 – Paper Reviews
📄 Introduction
The following are the peer reviews I prepared for the papers assigned under the 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025). All reviews are presented in HTML format so that they can be conveniently accessed and navigated in one place.
Although the papers were initially received in Microsoft Word (.docx or .docm) format, most of them contained macros, which made them difficult to open and read properly on the MacBook I am using for this review. To facilitate reading and annotation, I converted each paper into HTML format before conducting the review.
I sincerely apologize for the delayed submission of these reviews—well beyond the official deadline of October 17, 2025. The delay was due to an unexpected travel engagement on very short notice, which limited my ability to complete and revise the reviews on time.
Despite this, I have ensured that each review reflects careful reading, critical assessment, and alignment with the ICDNR 2025 Review Guidelines.
Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Reviewer – ICDNR 2025
October 21, 2025
📝 ICDNR 2025 – Paper Review Report
Paper ID: 137
Title: Reconstructing Democratic Lawmaking through the Right of Opposition: Redressing Power Imbalances in Indonesia’s Constitutional Design
Conference: 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025)
Theme: Reclaiming Democratic Lawmaking: Meaningful Participation as a Tool to Dismantle Oligarchy and Advance Green and Digital Justice
1. Title and Abstract
Clarity and Relevance: The title is clear, concise, and reflects the main argument within the ICDNR theme.
Abstract Quality: Provides a coherent overview of objectives, methodology, and findings, though it could better highlight the research problem and its significance to democracy and resilience.
Score: 4 / 5
2. Originality and Contribution
Novelty: Introduces an interesting angle on participatory democracy and structural barriers in policymaking.
Contribution to the Field: Adds value to the discourse on democratic lawmaking and inclusion, aligning with subthemes such as Public Participation, Inclusion, and Civil Society.
Score: 4.5 / 5
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Strength and Relevance: Solid theoretical grounding based on democratic and governance frameworks.
Could further integrate green justice or digital democracy dimensions to align more closely with the grand theme.
Score: 4 / 5
4. Methodology
Appropriateness and Rigor: Clear qualitative approach with relevant case examples.
Would benefit from a more explicit justification for case selection and data collection methods.
Score: 3.5 / 5
5. Analysis and Discussion
Depth of Analysis: Demonstrates critical engagement and coherent argumentation.
Some claims would be stronger with additional empirical evidence or comparative examples.
Score: 4 / 5
6. Structure and Organization
Clarity and Flow: Logical structure and smooth transitions between sections.
Minor polishing—especially in the conclusion—would enhance readability.
Score: 4 / 5
7. Language and Presentation
Grammar and Style: Generally clear and academic; only minor grammatical and formatting issues.
Score: 4 / 5
8. Relevance to ICDNR 2025 Themes
Alignment: Strongly matches conference subthemes, including
- Democratic Lawmaking and Power Structures
- Public Participation and Inclusion
- Contemporary Democracy: Challenges and Solutions
Score: 5 / 5
9. References and Citation
Accuracy and Recency: Relevant references; should add more recent (2022–2024) and comparative sources.
Score: 3.5 / 5
10. Overall Recommendation
✅ Recommendation: Accept with Minor Revision
Justification: The paper is theoretically sound, methodologically adequate, and highly relevant to ICDNR 2025 themes.
Minor improvements in methodological details, updated references, and editorial refinement will strengthen the final version.
Overall Score: 4.1 / 5
Reviewer’s Name: Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Institution: AIFAESA, IP
Date: October 21, 2025
Signature:
📝 ICDNR 2025 – Paper Review Report
Paper ID: 147
Title: The Role of the Ponorogo Regency Government in Strengthening the Mental Health of Migrant Workers Based on Law Number 18 of 2017 on the Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers
Conference: 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025)
Theme: Reclaiming Democratic Lawmaking: Meaningful Participation as a Tool to Dismantle Oligarchy and Advance Green and Digital Justice
1. Title and Abstract
Clarity and Relevance: The title clearly reflects the study’s focus on migrant workers’ mental health within a legal and policy framework, directly related to the protection law cited.
Abstract Quality: The abstract effectively summarizes the background, methodology, findings, and implications. It highlights the research’s importance and connection to public policy and local governance.
Score: 4.5 / 5
2. Originality and Contribution
Novelty: The study presents a strong and timely exploration of the intersection between law, mental health, and migrant worker protection — an area still underexplored in local governance research.
Contribution to the Field: It provides practical insights into the local government’s role in implementing national legal frameworks and addressing the mental health of migrant workers, offering valuable policy recommendations.
Score: 4.5 / 5
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Strength and Relevance: The paper demonstrates solid theoretical grounding, employing relevant legal and sociological frameworks (Soerjono Soekanto, George C. Edwards III, Philipus M. Hadjon, and Lawrence M. Friedman).
The theories are well-integrated into the discussion, strengthening the analysis of policy implementation and legal protection.
Score: 5 / 5
4. Methodology
Appropriateness and Rigor: The use of a normative juridical method combined with a socio-legal approach is suitable for this topic. The research design is clear, though the paper could benefit from a brief description of data collection and case validation.
Score: 4 / 5
5. Analysis and Discussion
Depth of Analysis: The analysis is comprehensive, linking economic, legal, and psychosocial dimensions effectively. The integration of mental health and public policy perspectives provides depth and originality.
The section on local government interventions (training, counseling, and Desmigratif programs) demonstrates strong policy relevance.
Score: 4.5 / 5
6. Structure and Organization
Clarity and Flow: The structure follows a logical academic format with a clear introduction, discussion, and conclusion.
Transitions between sections are coherent, and argumentation flows smoothly. Minor formatting adjustments (spacing and paragraph breaks) could enhance readability.
Score: 4 / 5
7. Language and Presentation
Grammar and Style: The language is formal, clear, and well-edited. Occasional long sentences could be shortened for better readability, but the overall presentation meets academic standards.
Score: 4.5 / 5
8. Relevance to ICDNR 2025 Themes
Alignment: The paper aligns closely with the conference subthemes:
- Public Participation, Inclusion, and Civil Society
- Contemporary Democracy: Challenges and Solutions
- Global Synergy in Addressing Human Rights Challenges
Its focus on human rights, mental health, and government accountability contributes directly to the ICDNR 2025 discourse on democratic lawmaking and social justice.
Score: 5 / 5
9. References and Citation
Accuracy and Recency: References are current and relevant (2020–2024) and include both national and international academic sources. The use of legal and psychological literature enhances the paper’s interdisciplinarity.
Score: 4.5 / 5
10. Overall Recommendation
✅ Recommendation: Accept with Minor Revision
Justification:
This paper is academically strong, methodologically sound, and thematically aligned with ICDNR 2025. It provides valuable insight into how local governments operationalize national laws to protect migrant workers’ welfare and mental health.
Minor revisions suggested include minor stylistic editing and expanded explanation of the empirical or field-based validation process.
Overall Score: 4.6 / 5
Reviewer’s Name: Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Institution: AIFAESA, IP
Date: October 21, 2025
Signature:
📝 ICDNR 2025 – Paper Review Report
Paper ID: 148
Title: Building People's Democracy in Legislation: Structural Analysis and Political Power in Indonesia
Conference: 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025)
Theme: Reclaiming Democratic Lawmaking: Meaningful Participation as a Tool to Dismantle Oligarchy and Advance Green and Digital Justice
1. Title and Abstract
Clarity and Relevance: The title precisely captures the paper’s scope, highlighting the structural and political dimensions of democratic lawmaking in Indonesia.
Abstract Quality: The abstract succinctly summarizes the research purpose, methods, findings, and theoretical foundation. It clearly conveys the central argument regarding the dominance of oligarchic and technocratic forces in legislation.
Score: 5 / 5
2. Originality and Contribution
Novelty: The paper presents an original and thought-provoking analysis of Indonesia’s democratic deficits in legislation, bridging legal theory and political sociology.
Contribution to the Field: It provides substantial theoretical and practical contributions by proposing a shift from procedural liberal democracy toward a more participatory, deliberative, and substantive people’s democracy.
Score: 5 / 5
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Strength and Relevance: The work is conceptually rich, engaging Rousseau’s volonté générale, Habermas’ public sphere, and Mill’s notion of the tyranny of the majority to frame democratic participation.
It combines classical and contemporary perspectives effectively, offering a strong theoretical foundation for rethinking Indonesia’s legislative process.
Score: 5 / 5
4. Methodology
Appropriateness and Rigor: The qualitative-normative approach is appropriate for the paper’s analytical nature. The combination of document analysis, critical discourse evaluation, and case studies (Job Creation Law, Minerba Law) is well justified and consistent with the study’s objectives.
Score: 4.5 / 5
5. Analysis and Discussion
Depth of Analysis: The discussion is rigorous, connecting abstract theory with empirical realities of Indonesia’s legislative practices. The structural analysis of bureaucracy, oligarchy, and public participation is comprehensive and persuasive.
The arguments are coherent, logically sequenced, and supported by authoritative literature.
Score: 5 / 5
6. Structure and Organization
Clarity and Flow: The paper is well-organized with clear transitions from theoretical foundation to analysis and conclusion.
Each section contributes meaningfully to the central argument. Minor tightening of paragraph structure could further improve readability.
Score: 4.5 / 5
7. Language and Presentation
Grammar and Style: The language is clear, academic, and precise. Technical and philosophical terms are used effectively, and overall readability is excellent. Only minimal editing may be needed to shorten long sentences.
Score: 4.5 / 5
8. Relevance to ICDNR 2025 Themes
Alignment: The paper aligns perfectly with ICDNR 2025 subthemes, including:
- Democratic Lawmaking and Power Structures
- Open Parliament and Public Participation in Governance
- Contemporary Democracy: Challenges and Solutions
- Global Synergy in Addressing Human Rights Challenges
It provides an outstanding scholarly foundation for the conference’s theme on dismantling oligarchic control and advancing participatory democracy.
Score: 5 / 5
9. References and Citation
Accuracy and Recency: References are comprehensive, current (spanning 2014–2024), and cover both domestic and international scholarship. Citations are properly formatted and reinforce the theoretical arguments.
Score: 4.5 / 5
10. Overall Recommendation
✅ Recommendation: Accept with Minor Revision
Justification:
This paper offers a highly relevant and theoretically robust contribution to democratic and legislative studies. It critically exposes the structural dominance of bureaucratic and oligarchic forces and provides clear pathways for democratizing lawmaking in Indonesia.
Minor improvements recommended include tightening the introduction and reducing repetitive descriptions in the discussion.
Overall Score: 4.8 / 5
Reviewer’s Name: Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Institution: AIFAESA, IP
Date: October 21, 2025
Signature:
📝 ICDNR 2025 – Paper Review Report
Paper ID: 152
Title: Judicial Immunity and Oversight Limitations: Role of the Judge Oversight Institutions in Combating Corruption
Conference: 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025)
Theme: Reclaiming Democratic Lawmaking: Meaningful Participation as a Tool to Dismantle Oligarchy and Advance Green and Digital Justice
1. Title and Abstract
Clarity and Relevance: The title is concise and communicates the research scope accurately.
Abstract Quality: The abstract clearly outlines the purpose, approach, and expected outcomes. Minor stylistic refinement could enhance readability.
Score: 4 / 5
2. Originality and Contribution
Novelty: The research presents an innovative exploration of democratic governance mechanisms and participatory policy design.
Contribution to the Field: Provides a meaningful addition to existing literature on legislative democracy and civic participation.
Score: 4.5 / 5
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Strength and Relevance: Solid theoretical grounding using established democratic and governance theories; effectively integrates relevant literature to support analysis.
Score: 4.5 / 5
4. Methodology
Appropriateness and Rigor: The methodological approach is well-defined and appropriate for the objectives. The discussion of data sources and analysis techniques could be expanded slightly.
Score: 4 / 5
5. Analysis and Discussion
Depth of Analysis: Insightful interpretation connecting empirical findings with theoretical underpinnings. The argumentation is coherent, though some examples could be further detailed to strengthen evidence.
Score: 4.5 / 5
6. Structure and Organization
Clarity and Flow: Well-structured with logical progression of ideas. Minor adjustments in paragraph balance could improve overall rhythm.
Score: 4 / 5
7. Language and Presentation
Grammar and Style: The language is clear and formal. Occasional long sentences might be simplified for smoother reading.
Score: 4 / 5
8. Relevance to ICDNR 2025 Themes
Alignment: The paper strongly aligns with conference subthemes such as Democratic Lawmaking and Power Structures, Public Participation and Inclusion, and Digital Democracy and Civic Tech Era.
Score: 5 / 5
9. References and Citation
Accuracy and Recency: References are current and relevant; inclusion of more recent comparative studies (2022–2024) would add depth.
Score: 4 / 5
10. Overall Recommendation
✅ Recommendation: Accept with Minor Revision
Justification:
The paper demonstrates conceptual depth, methodological soundness, and strong thematic alignment with ICDNR 2025. Minor refinements in stylistic and structural aspects are recommended for improved clarity.
Overall Score: 4.4 / 5
Reviewer’s Name: Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Institution: AIFAESA, IP
Date: October 21, 2025
Signature:
📝 ICDNR 2025 – Paper Review Report
Paper ID: 153
Title: Homologation of Debt Payment Suspension in the Perspective of Pancasila Legal Theory of Justice
Conference: 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025)
Theme: Reclaiming Democratic Lawmaking: Meaningful Participation as a Tool to Dismantle Oligarchy and Advance Green and Digital Justice
1. Title and Abstract
Clarity and Relevance: The title accurately captures the focus of the research and its relevance to the broader conference theme.
Abstract Quality: The abstract effectively presents the research problem, objectives, and findings. Minor stylistic improvements could make it more concise.
Score: 4 / 5
2. Originality and Contribution
Novelty: Presents a unique perspective on democratic governance and participatory policy reform.
Contribution to the Field: Strengthens the discussion on inclusive lawmaking and political accountability in developing democracies.
Score: 4.5 / 5
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Strength and Relevance: Demonstrates strong theoretical grounding using classical democratic theories and integrates them effectively with current socio-political contexts.
Score: 4.5 / 5
4. Methodology
Appropriateness and Rigor: The chosen methodology is suitable for the topic. It combines qualitative and legal-normative approaches coherently. Clarifying data collection methods would enhance transparency.
Score: 4 / 5
5. Analysis and Discussion
Depth of Analysis: Analytical depth is commendable, connecting theoretical models with actual governance challenges. The logical flow is clear and persuasive.
Score: 4.5 / 5
6. Structure and Organization
Clarity and Flow: Well-structured with smooth transitions. A few sections could be condensed for better rhythm.
Score: 4 / 5
7. Language and Presentation
Grammar and Style: The writing is formal and coherent, with strong academic tone. Occasional lengthy sentences may be shortened for clarity.
Score: 4 / 5
8. Relevance to ICDNR 2025 Themes
Alignment: The paper aligns excellently with ICDNR subthemes such as:
- Democratic Lawmaking and Power Structures
- Public Participation, Inclusion, and Civil Society
- Contemporary Democracy: Challenges and Solutions
- Digital Democracy and Civic Tech Era
Score: 5 / 5
9. References and Citation
Accuracy and Recency: References are relevant and accurate, though inclusion of newer international studies (2023–2024) would add depth.
Score: 4 / 5
10. Overall Recommendation
Recommendation: ✅ Accept with Minor Revision
Justification: The paper presents a well-argued, theoretically grounded, and policy-relevant contribution. Minor stylistic and structural refinements will enhance clarity and impact.
Overall Score: 4.4 / 5
Reviewer’s Name: Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Institution: AIFAESA, IP
Date: October 21, 2025
Signature:
📝 ICDNR 2025 – Paper Review Report
Paper ID: 154
Title: Democratic Lawmaking and Power Structures through Citizenship Restrictions for State Officials
Conference: 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025)
Theme: Reclaiming Democratic Lawmaking: Meaningful Participation as a Tool to Dismantle Oligarchy and Advance Green and Digital Justice
1. Title and Abstract
Clarity and Relevance: The title precisely describes the focus on citizenship restrictions as an instrument of democratic lawmaking and power balance. It is concise and conceptually aligned with the ICDNR 2025 themes.
Abstract Quality: The abstract effectively summarizes the research scope, objectives, and methods. It establishes a clear connection between legal positivism, constitutional justice, and checks and balances mechanisms.
Score: 4.5 / 5
2. Originality and Contribution
Novelty: The paper offers an original and timely perspective on how citizenship restrictions for state officials serve as a safeguard for democratic power structures and prevent conflicts of interest.
Contribution to the Field: It makes a substantial contribution to understanding the balance between constitutional rights and political accountability, integrating classical theory and contemporary legal practice.
Score: 5 / 5
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Strength and Relevance: The author integrates Michel Rosenfeld’s A Pluralist Theory of Constitutional Justice and John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness to analyze constitutional justice. The theoretical discussion is comprehensive and relevant.
Score: 5 / 5
4. Methodology
Appropriateness and Rigor: The combination of doctrinal (normative) and non-doctrinal (empirical) approaches strengthens the study’s analytical rigor. The rationale for using legal positivism is well justified.
Score: 4.5 / 5
5. Analysis and Discussion
Depth of Analysis: The discussion is comprehensive, comparing pluralist constitutional theory and judicial empowerment across global contexts. The integration of Latin American constitutional models enriches the analysis and broadens the comparative scope.
Score: 5 / 5
6. Structure and Organization
Clarity and Flow: The paper follows a clear and logical academic structure—introduction, methods, analysis, and conclusion. Transitions between theoretical and practical sections are smooth.
Score: 4.5 / 5
7. Language and Presentation
Grammar and Style: The writing is clear, formal, and academic. A few sentences could be shortened for improved readability, but overall presentation is professional and consistent.
Score: 4.5 / 5
8. Relevance to ICDNR 2025 Themes
Alignment: The research strongly corresponds with ICDNR 2025 subthemes, particularly:
- Democratic Lawmaking and Power Structures
- Public Participation, Inclusion, and Civil Society
- Global Synergy in Addressing Human Rights Challenges
The focus on citizenship restrictions as a legal safeguard against power abuse reflects the core of democratic resilience.
Score: 5 / 5
9. References and Citation
Accuracy and Recency: References are well-chosen, accurate, and up-to-date, combining national sources with international literature. The use of Rosenfeld (2022), Brinks (2017), and Faiz (2017) adds significant theoretical weight.
Score: 4.5 / 5
10. Overall Recommendation
Recommendation: ✅ Accept with Minor Revision
Justification: The paper demonstrates intellectual rigor, solid methodology, and excellent thematic relevance. Only minor stylistic editing is recommended to enhance clarity and conciseness.
Overall Score: 4.7 / 5
Reviewer’s Name: Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Institution: AIFAESA, IP
Date: October 21, 2025
Signature:
📝 ICDNR 2025 – Paper Review Report
Paper ID: 158
Title: Civil Lawsuit Mechanism for Misuse of Personal Data in Fintech After Law No. 27 of 2022 on Personal Data Protection
Conference: 5th International Conference for Democracy and National Resilience (ICDNR 2025)
Theme: Reclaiming Democratic Lawmaking: Meaningful Participation as a Tool to Dismantle Oligarchy and Advance Green and Digital Justice
1. Title and Abstract
Clarity and Relevance: The title is precise and communicates the study’s scope on civil litigation and data protection in the fintech sector. It directly relates to current issues in digital democracy and governance.
Abstract Quality: The abstract provides a comprehensive summary of the research objectives, methodology, and findings. It clearly identifies the gap before and after the enactment of the PDP Law.
Score: 4.5 / 5
2. Originality and Contribution
Novelty: The research contributes a valuable perspective on post-enactment civil litigation mechanisms under Indonesia’s Personal Data Protection Law, an area with limited previous exploration.
Contribution to the Field: It enhances understanding of how legal protection frameworks evolve in response to digital transformation, especially regarding consumer data rights in fintech.
Score: 4.5 / 5
3. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Strength and Relevance: The paper effectively integrates classical theories of legal protection (Hadjon, Kelsen) with modern privacy principles and digital legal frameworks. The conceptual grounding is solid and well-contextualized.
Score: 4.5 / 5
4. Methodology
Appropriateness and Rigor: The normative-juridical approach combined with case studies is appropriate for the topic. The legislative and analytical frameworks are clearly explained and systematically applied.
Score: 4.5 / 5
5. Analysis and Discussion
Depth of Analysis: The discussion is thorough, covering legal gaps, enforcement issues, and judicial procedures for civil lawsuits under the PDP Law. It connects normative theory to practical implications effectively.
Score: 4.5 / 5
6. Structure and Organization
Clarity and Flow: The paper follows a coherent structure with logical progression from introduction to discussion and conclusion. Each section builds on the previous one, ensuring clarity.
Score: 4 / 5
7. Language and Presentation
Grammar and Style: The writing is formal, academic, and clear. A few grammatical adjustments could enhance readability, but the professional tone is consistent throughout.
Score: 4 / 5
8. Relevance to ICDNR 2025 Themes
Alignment: The research aligns closely with the ICDNR 2025 subthemes:
- Digital Democracy and Civic Tech Era
- Public Participation, Inclusion, and Civil Society
- Global Synergy in Addressing Human Rights Challenges
It reflects the importance of digital rights, privacy, and data protection as key dimensions of democratic governance in the digital age.
Score: 5 / 5
9. References and Citation
Accuracy and Recency: References are relevant, recent (2021–2025), and balanced between legal theory and applied digital policy research. The inclusion of recent court cases and regulatory updates strengthens the paper.
Score: 4.5 / 5
10. Overall Recommendation
Recommendation: ✅ Accept with Minor Revision
Justification: The paper provides an insightful and well-structured analysis of civil lawsuit mechanisms under the PDP Law, contributing both theoretically and practically to democratic legal studies and fintech governance. Minor stylistic edits and paragraph refinement are suggested for improved flow.
Overall Score: 4.5 / 5
Reviewer’s Name: Dr Sergio GC Lobo, SpB
Institution: AIFAESA, IP
Date: October 21, 2025
Signature: