scholarly journals Judges' Legal Considerations (Ratio Decidendi) and Jurisdical Implications on the Criminal Acts of Continuous Corruption (Study of Supreme Court Decision No. 866 K/Pid. Sus/2016)

Author(s):  
Antonius Tigor W ◽  
Rehnalemken Ginting

This study intends to examine the legal considerations of the judges of the Supreme Court against the criminal act of corruption continued in the Supreme Court's decision number 866 K/Pid. Sus/2016. The decision stating that the convict is proven to have committed a criminal act of corruption continues, but the continued action is not stated in the consideration of the decision. The Supreme Court's decision number 866 K/Pidsus/2016 raises a big question mark regarding the legal basis for criminal prosecution for perpetrators of continuing corruption, this is because the Corruption Crime Law does not specifically regulate acts of continuing corruption. It is said to be a continuous act in a criminal act of corruption because the act is carried out continuously, both with similar crimes in corruption. Continuing action or also called Voorgezette handeling is an act (gebeuren) in which one action with another action is interrelated and becomes a single unit, the linkage must meet at least two conditions, namely the act is the embodiment of a forbidden will decision and an act that is prohibited. happen must be the same. This journal was created with the aim of being able to find out the judge's legal considerations for the criminal act of continuing corruption which was reviewed with the Ratio Decidendi Theory and the academic requirements to obtain a Master of Law degree at the Faculty of Law, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta. The research method used by the researcher is doctrinal research with a statutory approach and a case approach. The technique of collecting legal materials used is literature study. The legal material analysis technique used is deductive data analysis.

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 228
Author(s):  
Nurhadi Nurhadi

Since the birth of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 46/PUU-VIII/2010, the legal experts have discussed the positions of marriage children through articles, papers, books and seminars, pros and cons when interpreting the non-marital child, judges also gave birth to many interpretations. The Supreme Court (MA) has two views in adjudicating the marriage case, Supreme Court Decision Number 329 K/AG/2014 states that the ratification of an unmarried child is not a jurisdiction of the Religious Courts, whereas in Decision of Supreme Court Number 597 K/AG/2015 states that the non-marital children are legitimate even though the marriage of their parents only carries out marriage under Islamic law. The formulation of the problem is how the criteria of marital legitimacy in Indonesia? How is the outsider interpretation of the two Supreme Court decisions? The research method used is literature study, with the type of normative legal research, which is descriptive analytical. The conclusion is that in Supreme Court Decision Number 329 K/AG/2014 considered the marriage to be legitimately religious, but because it is not recorded so that the marriage does not get the certainty and protection of the law, consequently the child born from the marriage is not a legal child, whereas in Decision Number 597 K/AG/2015 The Supreme Court considers that although the marriage is not recorded, the child born from the marriage must still have legal certainty and protection so that the child is considered a legal child.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-62
Author(s):  
Rahmat Saputra

The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the actions of the defendant already fulfilling the elements of Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court Decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016 and to illustrate the basic consideration of the judge in imposing a verdict on a criminal offense charged with Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016. The method used in this study is normative law research. Data collection methods in this study were carried out with literature study, which is a method of collecting data by searching and reviewing library materials (literature, research results, scientific magazines, scientific bulletins, scientific journals). Data collection techniques using qualitative analysis methods. The conclusion in this study is the application of material criminal law by the Panel of Judges of the Supreme Court in the case of Number 1043 K / PID / 2016 which corrected the decision of the Banjarmasin High Court Number 59 / PID / 2016 / PT.BJM, dated 13 July 2016 which strengthened the Kotabaru District Court Decision Number 64 / Pid.B/2016/PN. Ktb, dated April 27, 2016 stating that the defendant Nanang Ramli bin (late) Syamsudin was proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal act of maltreatment which resulted in the death of the victim Jumadi alias jumai bin yahya ( alm) as stipulated in Article 351 paragraph (3) the Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code) is correct, it is in accordance with the Public Prosecutor's Subsidies indictment, and has been based on the facts of the trial, the evidence presented The Public Prosecutor is in the form of witness statements, evidence, post mortem, and statements of the defendant. The Panel of Judges of the Kotabaru District Court in its consideration there are still some shortcomings, especially in its subjective considerations, namely on consideration of things that are burdensome and matters that alleviate the defendant. The consideration used by the judge in this case only focuses on the perpetrators of the crime. Whereas Article 5 paragraph (1) of Law Number 48 Year concerning Judicial Power requires judges to explore, follow, and understand the legal values ​​and sense of justice that lives in society. This means that the judge must also consider the loss of the crime victim, and the community


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Agustine Azizah

The purpose of this study for reviewed the dispute resolution between the finance company and the consumer decided by BPSK in the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 210 K/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2015 and examine the consideration of the Supreme Court Judge stating that BPSK is not authorized to decide case in between consumer financing companies.This research is normative descriptive who use secondary data and collecting data use literature study. Data analysis use interactive model.The result of the research indicates that the Supreme Court Decision Number 210 K/Pdt.Sus- BPSK/2015 in the case of special dispute on consumer dispute between First Indo American Leasing Branch Bandung ("First Indo Finance") with BPSK Bandung and Neva Rahmansyah, SE stated that The Supreme Court rejected the appeal from the First Appeal Applicant of PT First Indo American Leasing Bandung ("First Indo Finance") and amended the decision of Bandung District Court Number 461/Pdt.G/2014/PN Bdg. dated December 24, 2014 so that it is clear that the Supreme Court accepted the exception of the petitioners and stated that BPSK is not authorized to examine and adjudicate the case and to punish the Cassation Applicant Applicant to pay the court fee in the appeal level stipulated at Rp 500,000 (five hundred thousand rupiahs). Consideration of the Supreme Court Judge stating that BPSK is not authorized to  decide the case in the case between the finance company and the consumer because the legal relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant constitutes a joint financing agreement with the fiduciary transfer of property, which implements civil law relationships and does not include consumer disputes as provided in the Act Number 8 Year 1999 on Consumer Protection so that the dispute arising from the implementation of the consumer financing agreement is a dispute agreement which is the authority of the District Court.  


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 287
Author(s):  
Tahegga Primananda Alfath

ABSTRAKKomisi Pemilihan Umum (KPU) membuat Peraturan KPU Nomor 26 Tahun 2018 tentang Perubahan Kedua Atas Peraturan KPU Nomor 14 Tahun 2018 tentang Pencalonan Perseorangan Pemilu Anggota Dewan Perwakilan Daerah yang khususnya diatur dalam Pasal 60A. Akan tetapi ketentuan pada peraturan tersebut diputus telah bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-undangan, dan tidak boleh dimaknai berlaku surut oleh Mahkamah Agung dalam Putusan Nomor 65P/ HUM/2018. Atas adanya fakta hukum yang tidak koheren tersebut, diambil isu hukum terkait kepastian hukum dapat atau tidaknya calon anggota Dewan Perwakilan Daerah yang juga merupakan pengurus (fungsionaris) partai. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus. Hasil dari penelitian ini, pertama, terdapat kesesatan dalam penalaran hukum pada ratio decidendi Putusan Nomor 65P/HUM/2018. Kedua, putusan Mahkamah Agung tersebut dapat disimpangi oleh KPU, karena sebagaimana dalam kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi melakukan pengujian konstitusionalitas terhadap undang-undang yang bersifat erga omnes.Kata kunci: racio decidendi; penalaran hukum; Dewan Perwakilan Daerah.  ABSTRACT The General Election Commission (KPU) has enacted KPU Regulation Number 26 of 2018 concerning the Second Amendment to KPU Regulation Number 14 of 2018 over the Nomination of Individual Election of Regional Representative Council Members. The provisions of this regulation, especially Article 60A, contravene with Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning the Legislation Drafting Process. In the Decision Number 65P/HUM/2018, the Supreme Court should not retroactively interpret the KPU regulation. Due to the incoherent legal facts, legal issues raised in this article is about legal certainty whether a candidate of the Regional Representative Council (DPD) member can also become a political party official. This research uses legal research methods with normative, conceptual, and case approaches. The results of this research are as follows. The results of this research are as follows. First, there are errors in legal reasoning on the ratio decidendi of the Supreme Court Decision Number 65P/ HUM/2018. Second, the Supreme Court Decision can be distorted by the KPU because the court acted like the Constitutional Court reviewing an erga omnes law. Keywords: racio decidendi; legal reasoning; Regional Representative Council.


Author(s):  
Redi Res

Parate executive is the primary purpose of establishing Law Number 4 of 1996 concerning Mortgage Rights to provide solid legal protection for creditors holding mortgage objects. The easy and inexpensive execution process should make the parate executive the leading choice for creditors in auctioning mortgage objects if the debtor defaults. However, in reality, the parate execution could not be carried out properly because of the Supreme Court Decision No. 3210 K/Pdt/1984, in which one of the ratio decidendi in it that the public auction conducted by the Bandung KPKNL is invalid, and this is also supported by book II of the Supreme Court's guidelines which requires fiat execution from the District Court. This paper will explain how the two conflicting legal bases will impact the implementation of parate executives in the field. Keywords: Parate Executie;  Mortgage; Land.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 348
Author(s):  
Ahmad Syauqi ◽  
Muhammad Bakri ◽  
Iwan Permadi

Tthis study aimed to analyze the validity of debt recognition letters and selling authorities (evidence P-2 and evidence P-3), the basis for judges’ considerations, and the legal consequences of the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/ 2012 for debtors and creditors. The method used in this study was normative juridical research with a statutory approach and a case approach. The results of the systematic interpretive analysis showed that the debt recognition letter (evidence P-2) and selling authorities (evidence P-3) in the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/ 2012 could be declared invalid. Juridically, the judges’ considerations were considered insufficient in examining the truth of the events in the Supreme Court Decision Number 2290 K/Pdt/2012. The legal consequences that occurred after the verdict, the creditor could have collateral for the land-based on an invalid debt acknowledgment but legalized by the panel of judges in the decision. The legal consequence for the debtor, the legal action to defend the land that was carried out by him was considered an act against the law


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 235
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto

ABSTRAKKejahatan korporasi saat ini tidak hanya dapat dilakukan oleh orang yang berada dalam struktur organisasi, tetapi pengendalinya bisa dilakukan oleh orang yang tidak tercantum dalam kepengurusan. Perundang-undangan tidak mengatur secara jelas bahwa pengendali korporasi yang berada di luar struktur organisasi dapat dijerat pemidanaan. Putusan Nomor 1081 K/PID.SUS/2014 menjatuhkan pidana terhadap pengendali korporasi yang tidak tercantum dalam kepengurusan. Menarik dipermasalahkan yaitu bagaimana urgensi pemidanaan terhadap pengendali korporasi yang tidak tercantum dalam kepengurusan. Metode penelitian normatif digunakan untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut. Dari hasil pembahasan disimpulkan bahwa hanya undang-undang tentang pencucian uang dan undang-undang tentang pendanaan terorisme yang mengatur tentang pengendali korporasi, tetapi pengaturannya masih belum jelas dalam mengidentifikasi pengendali korporasi yang tidak tercantum dalam kepengurusan. Putusan Nomor 1081 K/PID.SUS/2014 memberikan penjelasan hukum bahwa termasuk personel pengendali korporasi adalah seseorang yang tidak tercantum dalam struktur kepengurusan tetapi mempunyai kekuasaan dan kewenangan yang sangat menentukan dalam pengambilan keputusan perusahaan. Melalui kaidah hukum tersebut, Mahkamah Agung berhasil mengisi kekosongan hukum atas ruang lingkup personel pengendali korporasi di luar struktur kepengurusan. Putusan ini dapat dijadikan yurisprudensi dalam rangka efektivitas penanggulangan tindak pidana korporasi di Indonesia.Kata kunci: pemidanaan, pengendali, tindak pidana korporasi.ABSTRACT Corporate crime is now not only committed by the persons recorded in an organizational structure, but the controller can be done by people who are not recorded in the organization. The legislation does not set clearly that corporate controllers outside the organizational structure can be charged with criminal prosecution. Supreme Court Decision Number 1081 K/PID.SUS/2014 imposed a sentence against the corporate controllers that are not recorded in the organization. It is interesting to focus on the urgency of sentencing against unrecorded corporate controllers in the management of the organization. The normative research method is used in this analysis to see the sights of the problem. As of the discussion it is concluded that only Law on Money Laundering and Law on Terrorism regulating on the issue of corporate controller, yet still inexplicit in identifying the corporate controllers unrecorded in the management of organizational structure. The Court Decision Number 1081 K/PID.SUS/2014 provides the legal explanation stating that someone who is not included in the corporate governance structure but has the power and authority that is crucial in corporate decision-making is called the corporate controller. Through the rule of law, the Supreme Court has been successfully fills a legal vacuum on the scope of the corporate control of personnel outside the management structure. This ruling can be used as jurisprudence in the framework of effectiveness of the prevention of corporate crime in Indonesia.Keywords: sentencing, controller, corporate crime.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document