scholarly journals THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AGREEMENTS THAT ARE QUALIFIED AS FRAUD CRIME

Cepalo ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-22
Author(s):  
Joko Sriwidodo
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Civil Case ◽  
Library Research ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court

An agreement is a legal act in which a person promises to another person or more or in which two people promise to carry out something, as is also stated in Article 1313 of the Civil Code. Contract cases are the civil case domain, but they can become criminal offenses if what is promised is fictitious or a lie. However, the reality is that currently, in practice, many practitioners are confusing it so that the reporting party criminally reports many cases of this Agreement. The purpose of this research is to find out to what extent a case agreement can be reported criminally. The problems studied in this study are: (1) what is the significance of an agreement according to Indonesian Law? (2) what is the significance of an agreement as a criminal offense of fraud? In this research, the researcher provides an overview of the Agreement's significance according to national law and the meaning of the Agreement as a criminal offense of fraud, as we know that an agreement is a civil case domain but can be included in a criminal case if the elements as mentioned above are fulfilled. In Article 378 of the Criminal Code, as happened in the case of default as stated in the Supreme Court Jurisprudence No. 1689 K/Pid/2015, which gave a verdict that the defendant had violated Article 378 of the Criminal Code jo. 55 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. This research is normative legal research conducted through library research by conducting studies and analyzing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. And in writing this research, too, the researcher carried out observational activities of the practices carried out in the field.

PENALTIES PROVIDED FOR SERIOUS CRIMES IN THE CRIMINAL CODE OF UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Skok ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Police

The statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office on registered criminal offenses in the form of serious crimes for 2020 and 2021 were reviewed. Based on this, the number of serious crimes registered by the National Police of Ukraine during the reporting periods was determined. The provisions of the current Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine, the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No 7 of October 24, 2003 are analyzed, as well as some scientific positions of domestic scientists Knyzhenko O. O are taken into account. and Berezhnyuk V. M In addition, a review of the case law of the Supreme Court of Cassation on sentencing was studied. A thorough criminal-legal analysis of the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the part of punishments established for the category of serious crimes was carried out. Based on the analysis, it was determined which main and additional punishments are regulated in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the investigated category of crimes. The quantitative and qualitative indicator of sanctions for serious crimes has been determined, which include: imprisonment for a definite term; punishments alternative to imprisonment; additional penalties. Legislative and doctrinal provisions on punishments in the form of imprisonment for a definite term, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest are considered. The judicial practice of Ukraine in the part of certain issues related to the execution of a penalty in the form of a fine and the replacement of a penalty in the form of a fine with a penalty in the form of correctional labor is analyzed. It is established that the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in the sanctions of the articles, provides for the application to a person who has committed a serious crime, punishment in the form of imprisonment, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest - as the main punishment. The range of additional punishments is defined, which determine: confiscation of property, deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities and a fine.

scholarly journals Disparitas Penuntutan Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan dalam Sistem Pemidanaan di Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-78
Author(s):  
Benny Leonard Saragih ◽  
Ediwarman Ediwarman ◽  
Muaz Zul
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Internal Factors ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Substantive Law

Difference in punishment or sentencing disparity is basically a natural thing because it can be said almost no case that is really the same. Disparity becomes a problem when the range of the sentence imposed differences between similar cases so large, giving rise to injustice and can give rise to suspicions in the community. Disparities in the Criminal (disparity of sentencing) is not the same as the application of criminal offenses against the same (same offense) or the criminal acts that are dangerous to be compared (offenses of comparable seriousness) without clear justification. Based on Law No. 16 of 2004 which replaced Law No. 5 of 1991 About the Prosecutor of the Republic of Indonesia is an institution in the field of prosecution of the main authority of the public prosecutor act prosecution about what is meant by the prosecution as well as the reference to the provisions of Article 1 point 7 and Article 137 Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Law of Criminal Procedure Code (Criminal Code). Research Methods in writing this thesis carried out by the method of normative law, namely analyzing and searching for answers to the problems raised by the substantive law / legal norms contained in the rules of law, the Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA), the Supreme Court Circular, and etc. Factors that cause the disparity criminal offense namely Legislation Provisions factors, internal factors and external factors.

scholarly journals PENERAPAN WASIAT WAJIBAH TERHADAP NON MUSLIM DITINJAU DARI KOMPILASI HUKUM ISLAM (KHI) STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO. 331/K/AG/2018/MA

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Liana Noviyanti ◽  
Mulati Mulati
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Supreme Court Ruling ◽  
Library Research ◽  
The Supreme Court

Islamic law has stated that every person of different religion cannot inherit each other, both Muslims inherit for non-Muslims and from non-Muslims inherit for Muslims, but in practice, Judges at the Supreme Court level implement mandatory wills, this is required which has been decided in the Supreme Court Decision Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA. This study aims to examine how to implement the mandatory non-Muslim wills in the Supreme Court ruling Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA based on the provisions of the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), and what the Supreme Court Judges consider in implementing mandatory testaments against non-Muslims in the Supreme Court Decision Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA. This research is a normative legal research with the nature of qualitative research with the type of library research. Based on the studies that have been carried out, the Decision of the Supreme Court Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA does not include legal considerations in force in Indonesia concerning inheritance provisions and concerning the granting of an approved mandatory will set out in the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI). The application of mandatory wills in the Supreme Court Decision is contrary to the provisions of Islamic Law and the provisions of the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI). Article 209 paragraphs (1) and (2) concerning mandatory wills.

scholarly journals Criminal Accountability for Corruption Actors in the Form of Concursus Realist

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-332
Author(s):  
Redentor G A Obe ◽  
Indah Sri Utari
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
State University ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Design Data ◽  
Library Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic

The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the criminal liability arrangements for the perpetrators of corruption in the form of concurrent acts, finding juridical reasons to the extent to which corruption in the form of concurrent acts can be justified. This research method uses a qualitative approach with normative juridical law design. Data collection techniques using library research Subjects library research law faculty of Semarang State University. Data analysis techniques: (1) presentation, (2) data reduction, and (3) collection and verification. The results of the study: (1) the form of criminal liability from the perpetrators of corruption in the form of a joint act is to follow the criminal procedure in the Criminal Code by dropping the absorption system which is made worse by the regulation contained in the Constitutional Court's decision in the results of the criminal chamber meeting of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Tangerang No 10 concerning the application of concursus teachings precisely in the parallel act of corruption. Conclusions of the study that the doctrine of concursus results of the criminal chamber meeting of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Tangerang has a legal basis that serves as a guideline or legal basis so that the action does not go outside the lines of statutory provisions in the implementation of decision making in imposing penalties for the perpetrators of acts corruption in the form of a parallel act.

scholarly journals REMODELLING AND REPOSITIONING OF COURT’S MEDIATION IN INDONESIA

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Benny Riyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Ideal Model ◽  
Civil Case ◽  
Civil Court ◽  
Legal Factor ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Ideal

This article is intended to explain the failure of the use of mediation in Indonesia, particularly mediation which is integrated with the court (court connected mediation). The focus of the problem in this study is about the ideal model of court connected mediation as a strategy to achieve the hope of strengthening and to maximize the function of judiciary institutions in resolving dispute in Indonesia. A method of socio-legal research is used to reveal things that make mediation has not worked effectively in resolving civil case in court. This study resulted that the practice of mediation in civil court is very limited, especially dealing with a model applied by mediators, so it is not always appropriate to the situation faced by the parties in disputes. Moreover, although the Supreme Court Regulation allows co-mediation, in practice, it is never implemented. Even court connected mediation has become part of the dispute because it has been registered and published to public. So that it becomes a non-legal factor that influence the parties to reach agreement.  Keywords : mediation, mediator, civil case, model, court.

scholarly journals ANALISA PEMBELIAN BARANG UNDERPRICED SEBAGI BENTUK KESALAHAN DELIK PENADAHAN: TINJAUAN YURIDIS YURISPRUDENSI MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 2/YUR/PID/2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 106
Author(s):  
Vina Putri Salim ◽  
Tsamara Probo Ningrum ◽  
Risma Cahya Yudita Pratama ◽  
Nur Fadilah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
General Public ◽  
Market Price ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Movable Object ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Precautionary Measures

The purpose of this article is to find out the application of Supreme Court Jurisprudence Number 2 / Yur / Pid / 2018 which provides legal rules related to underpriced purchases as the fulfillment of the element "should be suspected that it was obtained from criminal offenses" in the offense. This research is legal research with a statutory approach and conceptual approach. The research results obtained are the application of the new legal rules in the Supreme Court Jurisprudence Number 2 / Yur / Pid / 2018 to the element of negligence in the offense delimitation in Article 480 of the Criminal Code. are required by law and do not exercise caution as required by law which is an element of negligence. In the element of not making guesses as required by law, it is related to the inner attitude of society in general, wherein movable objects the authorities are considered as the owner and society, in general, cannot know the market price of each movable object. This is different from immovable objects, where the authorities are not always the owners, where ownership is generally based on certificates so that the general public can know the price of the immovable object. In its development, registered and unregistered objects were born, whereas, in registered objects, the general public could find out the price of these registered objects, because ownership of these registered objects could be known publicly. About not taking the precautions required by law, which must be seen whether there is a behavior of the defendant to take preventive measures related to the origin of the goods, where when the buyer/seller has taken precautionary measures, it can be said that the buyer/seller has done the duty to be careful so that it cannot be said that negligence has occurred.

scholarly journals Ajaran Turut Serta Tindak Pidana Korupsi

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-52
Author(s):  
Harry Arfhan ◽  
Mohd. Din ◽  
Sulaiman Sulaiman
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Banda Aceh

Penyertaan pada dasarnya diatur dalam pasal 55 dan 56 KUHP yang berarti bahwa ada dua orang atau lebih yang melakukan suatu tindak pidana atau dengan perkataan ada dua orangatau lebih mengambil bahagian untuk mewujudkan suatu tindak pidana. Penyertaan di dalam Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi yaitu Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 jo Undang-Undang Nomor 20 tahun 2001 disebut sebagai pembantuan.Dalam putusan Kasasi Mahkamah Agung Nomor : 1769 K/PID.SUS/2015 menyatakan bahwa Terdakwa I Indra Gunawan Bin Alm. Saleh tersebut tidak terbukti secara sah dan menyakinkan bersalah melakukan perbuatan sebagaimana yang didakwakan dalam semua dakwaan Penuntut Umum dan Menyatakan Terdakwa II Irfan Bin Husen telah terbukti secara sah dan meyakinkan bersalah melakukan tindak pidana “Turut Serta Melakukan Korupsi”. Majelis Hakim Judex Factie Pengadilan Tinggi/Tipikor Banda Aceh dalam memeriksa dan mengadili perkara Aquo telah salah dalam menerapkan hukum atau suatu peraturan hukum tidak diterapkan atau diterapkan tidak sebagaimana mestinya, yaitu mengenai penerapan hukum pembuktian sehingga harus dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia.The participation is basically regulated in articles 55 and 56 of the Criminal Code, which means that there are two or more people who commit a crime or say that there are two or more people taking part to realize a crime. The participation in the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crime namely Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 is referred to as assistance. In the decision of the Supreme Court Cassation Number: 1769 K / PID.SUS / 2015 stated that Defendant I Indra Gunawan Bin Alm. Saleh is not proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing an act as charged in all charges of the Public Prosecutor and Stating Defendant II Irfan Bin Husen has been proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal offense "Also Participating in Corruption". Judex Factie Judge of the High Court / Corruption Court in Banda Aceh in examining and adjudicating the case of Aquo has been wrong in applying the law or a legal regulation was not applied or applied improperly, namely regarding the application of verification law so that it must be canceled by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia.

scholarly journals Tinjauan Yuridis Pengajuan Permohonan Peninjauan Kembali pada Perkara Pidana dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-105
Author(s):  
I Made Widi Adi Peremana ◽  
A. A. Sagung Laksmi Dewi ◽  
Ni Made Sukaryati Karma
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Library Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Circular Letter ◽  
The Republic

The study of this research is the submission of requests for reconsideration in criminal cases in the Indonesian legal system which became a polemic after the issuance of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 34 / XI-PUU / 2013 and Circular Letter of the Supreme Court (SEMA) Number 7 of 2014 concerning Submission of Reappeals in Cases Criminal. The research objectives to be achieved, in this case, are the regulation of legal reconsideration efforts in Indonesia and the procedure for submitting a request for review in the Indonesian system. Researchers use a normative juridical approach or library research or doctrinal legal research which can be interpreted as legal research by examining library materials and secondary materials. This study illustrates that the regulations for reconsideration in the legal system in Indonesia are based on various regulations, namely Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code, Law No. 3 of 2009 concerning the Supreme Court, Law no. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power, Circular Letter of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia No. 7 of 2014 concerning Review of Criminal Cases and Submission of Reconsiderations at this time refers to the provisions of the Circular Letter of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia No. 7 of 2014 concerning Reconsideration in Criminal Cases.  

scholarly journals Criminal infraction as a mean of differentiating criminal responsibility and punishment

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (12) ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
E. A. BABAYANTS ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Discussions caused by the initiative of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of a new category of offenses – criminal infraction which can occupy an intermediate link between an administrative offense and a criminal offense – do not stop. The article reveals the concept of a criminal infraction, lists its main features, considers the feasibility of introducing this category into domestic criminal legislation. A brief analysis of the legislation of a number of foreign countries is also given, the possibility of applying such experience in Russian conditions is assessed. The conclusion is formulated that it is necessary to recognize as fair the arguments challenging the necessity of adopting the draft law in the form in which it was submitted for consideration by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that in those countries where the category of criminal offense was introduced, a fundamental reform of the criminal legislation was required: a total revision of the norms of the existing criminal legislation or the adoption of a separate Code of criminal infractions (for example, in Kyrgyzstan). Based on this the draft law under consideration appears to be a half-measure, which will lead to the complication of the existing legal regulation. The most correct way to resolve the problem under consideration would be to reduce the number of minor offenses in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals TINJAUAN HUKUM TERHADAP PENERBITAN CEK KOSONG

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-50
Author(s):  
M SRIASTUTI AGUSTINA
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Closing Date ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Just Compensation

Abstrak Permasalahan yang sangat penting khususnya dalam penerbitan cek kosong  adalah apakah tindakan menerbitkan surat cek kosong merupakan delik atau bukan?Pada saat yang bagaimana tindakan menerbitkan surat cek kosong dapat dikatakan delik ?Sehingga perlu dilaksanakan tinjauan hokum terhadap penerbitan cek kosong yang bertujuan agar mengetahui apakah tindakan tersebut dapat dipidana atau cukup ganti rugi saja, untuk menentukan apakah perbuatan menerbitkan cek kosong merupakan delik atau bukan, maka perbuatan itu harus memenuhi unsur-unsur pidana, yang didalamnya terkandung unsur: penipuan/perkataan bohong atau niat yang tidak baik dari semula sehingga dapat dikenakan pidana yang diatur dalam pasal 378 Kitab  Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana(KUHP) yang dikuatkan dengan Yurisprudensi MA RI No. 133 K/Kr/1973 dan Yurisprudensi MA RI No. 1036 K/Pid/1989 tanggal 31 Agustus 1992. Penerbit cek bisa terhindar dari tuduhan menerbitkan cek kosong sebagai perbuatan pidana karena setelah rekeningnya ditutup oleh pihak Bank barulah cek yang bertanggal mundur (post date check) yang melebihi tanggal penutupan rekening gironya, ditunjukkan ke Bank untuk dicairkan, maka dapat dikenakan tuntutan perdata seperti yang diatur dalam pasal 1365 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata.   Kata Kunci :Tinjauan Hukum, Cek Kosong , Delik atau bukandelik   LEGAL REVIEW OF ISSUANCE OF BLANK CHECK   Abstract A very important issue, especially in the issuance of blank checks, is whether the act of issuing a blank check is a crime or not? At what time can the act of issuing a blank check be considered a crime? So it is necessary to carry out a legal review of the issuance of a blank check with the aim of finding out whether the act is can be punished or just compensation, to determine whether the act of issuing a blank check is an offense or not, then the act must meet the criminal elements, which contain the following elements: fraud / false speech or bad intentions from the beginning so that it can be subject to criminal which is regulated in article 378 of the Criminal Code (KUHP) which is strengthened by the Supreme Court Jurisprudence No. 133 K/Kr/1973 and MA RI Jurisprudence No. 1036 K/Pid/1989 dated August 31, 1992. A check issuer can avoid being accused of issuing a blank check as a criminal act because after the account is closed by the Bank, a post date check that exceeds the closing date of the checking account is shown to the Bank. to be disbursed, it can be subject to civil claims as regulated in Article 1365 of the Civil Code.   Keywords: Legal Review, Blank Check, Offense or Non-Delict  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document