scholarly journals INDEPENDENSI SISTEM PERADILAN MILITER DI INDONESIA (Studi Tentang Struktur Peradilan Militer) / THE INDEPENDENCY OF MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE INDONESIAN (The Study of The Structure of The Judiciary)

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Slamet Sarwo Edy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Body ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
District Court ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Military

Peradilan militer adalah badan yang melaksanakan kekuasaan kehakiman di lingkungan TNI untuk menegakan hukum dan keadilan. Pengadilan militer tidak berpuncak dan tidak diawasi oleh markas besar TNI, tetapi berpuncak dan diawasi oleh MA RI. Filosofi terjadinya ketidakmandirian dalam sistem peradilan militer pertama, karena faktor kepentingan militer (TNI) yaitu berkaitan dengan tugas pokok TNI mempertahankan kedaulatan negara, oleh karena itu dengan menempatkan peran komandan satuan (Ankum) maupun lembaga kepaperaan didalam sistem penegakan hukum tersebut. Kedua, pada awal pembentukan organisasi peradilan militer menempatkan aparat peradilan sipil sebagai penjabat pada pengadilan militer. Ketua pengadilan negeri yang ditunjuk sebagai tempat kedudukan pengadilan tentara karena jabatannya menjadi ketua pengadilan tentara. Panitera pengadilan negeri juga menjabat sebagai panitera pengadilan tentara, kepala kejaksaan negeri ditetapkan sebagai jaksa tentara. Keadaan demikian menimbulkan keberatan-keberatan dengan alasan dipandang akan tidak menguntungkan bagi militer ataupun kesatuan militer. Peradilan militer ke depan harus mandiri baik secara kelembagaan maupun secara fungsional. Dalam konteks itu maka penyidik adalah polisi militer yang terdiri AD, AL dan AU, bertanggung jawab kepada Danpuspom TNI. Penuntutan dan pelimpahan perkara ke pengadilan dilaksanakan oleh oditur militer yang bertanggung jawab kepada Orjen TNI. Kewenangan pengadilan tidak lagi didasarkan kepada kepangkatan terdakwa. Pembinaan organisasi, administrasi, dan finansial pengadilan militer sepenuhnya berada dibawah MARI sebagaimana diatur dalam undang-undang.Military Court is the body that conduct the judicial power in the Indonesian Military Force (TNI) scope to enforce law and justice. The Military Court does not culminate and not supervised by the Indonesian Military Force headquarters, but culminates and is supervised by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The Philosophy of  the occurrence of dependence in the first military justice system, because of the interest of the military (TNI) which is associated with its principal task of TNI is to defend the national sovereignty, for that reason, by putting the role of commander of the unit (Ankum) as well as kepaperaan within the law enforcement system. The Head of the district court also covers Military Court in his jurisdiction because of it the Head of district court becomes the Head of Military Court. The Registrar is automatically also the Registrar of Military Court, Head of State Prosecutors assigned as military prosecutor. These circumstances affect objections which are seen as unfavorable for military or military units. The authority of the Court is no longer based on the rank of the defendant, the hierarchy of court proceedings such as judges, military Prosecutors, defense attorneys, no longer use the rank but wearing a toga. Development of organizational, administrative, financial of Military Courts is fully under the Supreme Court held consequently as stipulated in the law of judicial power.  The execution of criminal act by military prison, executed equally as prisoner without discriminating the person by his rank. 

scholarly journals INDEPENDENSI SISTEM PERADILAN MILITER DI INDONESIA (Studi Tentang Struktur Peradilan Militer)

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Slamet Sarwo Edy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Body ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
District Court ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Military

Military Court is the body that conduct the judicial power in the Indonesian Military Force (TNI) scope to enforce law and justice. The Military Court does not culminate and not supervised by the Indonesian Military Force headquarters, but culminates and is supervised by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The Philosophy of  the occurrence of dependence in the first military justice system, because of the interest of the military (TNI) which is associated with its principal task of TNI is to defend the national sovereignty, for that reason, by putting the role of commander of the unit (Ankum) as well as kepaperaan within the law enforcement system. The Head of the district court also covers Military Court in his jurisdiction because of it the Head of district court becomes the Head of Military Court. The Registrar is automatically also the Registrar of Military Court, Head of State Prosecutors assigned as military prosecutor. These circumstances affect objections which are seen as unfavorable for military or military units. The authority of the Court is no longer based on the rank of the defendant, the hierarchy of court proceedings such as judges, military Prosecutors, defense attorneys, no longer use the rank but wearing a toga. Development of organizational, administrative, financial of Military Courts is fully under the Supreme Court held consequently as stipulated in the law of judicial power.  The execution of criminal act by military prison, executed equally as prisoner without discriminating the person by his rank.Keyword: dependency, independency, military justice system

scholarly journals SISTEM PERADILAN DI INDONESIA BERDASARKAN UUD NEGARA REPUBLIK INDONESIA TAHUN 1945

Yustitia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-62
Author(s):  
Ihat Subihat
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Library Studies ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

A country’s judicial system cannot be separated from the legal system in force in the country. In other words, a country’s justice system is a sub-system of the country’s justice system. Because the legal system that applies in Indonesia is a legal system based on the Pancasila and the 1945 constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the judicial system in Indonesia must also be based on Pancasila values and articles in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. This study was conducted by using normative juridical method by reviewing various legal materials; primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. While the data collection method was carried out through library studies. The analysis technique used descriptive method with prescriptive approach. The result of this study showed that the four judicial environments are under the Indonesia Supreme Court; general justice, religious justice, military justice and state administrative courts, as sub-judicial systems in Indonesia, each of which has an institutional, authority and legal structure separate events that differ from one another according to the specificity and absolute competence of each that cannot be mixed up. In contrast to other judicial environments which have adjusted to the changes in the new judicial power law, the institutional structure and authority of the courts within the military court which is part of the judicial system under the Supreme court of the Republic of Indonesia is still regulated in Law Number 31 of 1997 concerning Military justice and not yet adjusted to Lay Number 14 of 2004 concerning Judicial Power, because the Amendment Draft to the Law on Military Justice which had been discussed since 2005 has not yet been agreed upon by the DPR and the Government. Even when the Lay on Military Justice cannot be adjusted to Law Number 4 of 2004, on October 29, 2009 Law Number 4 of 2004 was revoked and then replaced with Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning the latest Judicial Power.

A Curious Decision by Zambia’s Highest Court: Six Years Imprisonment for Civil Contempt?

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-138
Author(s):  
Christopher Phiri
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

Abstract On 23 November 2018, the Supreme Court of Zambia delivered a judgement which suggests that Zambian judges have virtually unbridled power to move on their own motion to punish for contempt of court anyone who criticises their judicial decisions. This article considers that judgement. It argues that whilst justice might well have been done in the case in question, it was certainly not seen to be done. Two main reasons are given for this argument. First, the judges appeared to have acted both as prosecutors and adjudicators in their own cause when it was neither urgent nor imperative to act immediately on their own motion. Second, the classification by the Court of the contempt in question as civil contempt rather than criminal contempt is alien to the common law world. The article culminates in a clarion call for the Zambian legislature to intervene and clarify the law of contempt of court to avert capricious and unbridled invocation of the judicial power to punish for contempt.

scholarly journals EFFECTIVENESS IN IMPLEMENTING SUPREME COURT REGULATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA NUMBER 2 YEAR 2015 ON PROCEDURES SETTLEMENT OF SIMPLE LAWSUIT IN SETTLING THE CIVIL CASES

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Wiryatmo Lukito Totok ◽  
Anik Iftitah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
District Court ◽  
Code System ◽  
Medium Term ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Effectiveness Index

President Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 Year 2015 on the National Medium Term Development Plan 2015-2019 mandates to carry out Reformation of the Civil Code system which is easy and fast, in an effort to improve the competitiveness of national economy. Related to this, the Supreme Court answered the vacancy of a simple lawsuit by issuing Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia (PERMA) Number 2 Year 2015 on procedures for settlement of simple suit in settling civil cases. The empirical juridical research in the Court of Kediri showed that the implementation of Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 Year 2015 made the lawsuit procedure simpler and very effective and in accordance with the principle of simple, fast and light cost. Effectiveness Index of Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 year 2015 at Kediri District Court Class I B was in the "good" category, influenced by substance rule of the law, legal culture, structure of the law, and community knowledge. Keywords: Effectiveness, Simple Lawsuit Received: 07 January, 2017; Accepter: 15 March, 2017

scholarly journals Tax Debt in the Bankruptcy Dispute: Industries Badja Garuda Inc. v.s. Tax Office of Medan Belawan

Rechtsidee ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rilda Murniati ◽  
Richmond Cosmas Tobias
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
Study Type

The biggest problem for the debtor who is the business actor is his inability to repay the loan to the creditors in case the business activities have problems. The inability to pay may result in the debtor being petitioned for bankruptcy by the creditor or the debtor himself. Curator as the party who performs the management and the settlement of all debtor debts is obliged to make a bill list based on the nature and rights of the bills of creditors as stipulated in Act Number 37 Year 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Obligation for Payment of Debts (the Law 37/2004). The problem that occurred in the case of Bankruptcy of Industries Badja Garuda Inc. (IBG Inc.) that the Tax Office of Medan Belawan (Tax Office) made a legal effort against the list of tax bills made by the curator of IBG Inc. which set Tax Office as the concurrent creditor through renvoi procedures to the Court Commerce so that the Tax Office loses its precedent over tax debt as stipulated in the Law of Commercial Court refuses the request so that the cassation law is also applied to the Supreme Court which in its decision strengthen the decision of the District Court. For that reason, there is a review effort but the Supreme Court in its sentence Number 45 PK/Pdt.Sus/Pailit/2016 still reinforces the previous verdict. This research is normative research with descriptive type and problem approach applied is normative applied with case study type of court decision. The result of the research indicates that the Tax Office has lost its predecessor right as regulated in Article 21 Paragraph (4) in Act Number 16 Year 2009 regarding General Provisions and Tax Procedures (the Law 16/2009) on the status of tax debt of IBG Inc.

scholarly journals Penerapan Asas Audi Alteram Et Partem Pada Perkara Judicial review Di Mahkamah Agung

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Asep Syarifuddin Hidayat
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Trial Process ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact

Abstract.Article 13 paragraph 1 of Act Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power states that all court hearings are open to the public, unless the Act says otherwise. Therefore, a judicial review trial must be open to the public. If the trial process of the judicial review is carried out in a closed manner, it can be considered a legal defect, because it is contrary to Article 13 paragraph (3) of the Law. The Law of the Supreme Court is not regulated that the judicial review is closed, because in the judicial review there is a need for openness or principle of audiences of parties or litigants must be given the opportunity to provide information and express their opinions, including the defendant as the maker of Legislation invitation under the law, so that the impact of the decision will need to be involved.Keywords: Judicial Review, Audi Alteram Et Partem Principle, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court Abstrak.Pasal 13 ayat 1 Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman menyebutkan semua sidang pemeriksaan pengadilan terbuka untuk umum, kecuali Undang-Undang berkata lain. Oleh karena itu,  judicial review persidangan harus dilakukan terbuka untuk umum. Apabila proses persidangan judicial review ini dilakukan secara tertutup, maka dapat dinilai cacat hukum karena bertentangan dengan Pasal 13 ayat (3) Undang-Undang tersebut. Undang-Undang Mahkamah Agung pun tidak diatur bahwa persidangan judicial review bersifat tertutup, karena dalam judicial review perlu adanya keterbukaan atau asas audi alteram et partem atau pihak-pihak yang berperkara harus diberi kesempatan untuk memberikan keterangan dan menyampaikan pendapatnya termasuk pihak termohon sebagai  pembuat Peraturan Perundang-Undangan di bawah Undang-Undang sehingga akan terkena dampak putusan perlu dilibatkan.Kata Kunci: Judicial Review, Asas Audi Alteram Et Partem, Mahkamah Agung, Mahkamah Konstitusi.

scholarly journals PASANG SURUT HUBUNGAN ANTARA MAHKAMAH AGUNG DENGAN KOMISI YUDISIAL DALAM SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Fauzan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between the Supreme Court by the Judicial Commission in the Republic of Indonesia system is not harmonious, this is due to the first, the disharmony between the law on judicial power, including the law on Judicial Power, the law on the Supreme Court, the law on Constitutional Court and the law on the Judicial Commission. Both of the leadership character that exist in the Supreme Court and the Judicial Commission were too emphasizes in ego that one sector feel more superior than the others. To create a harmonious relationship between Supreme Court and Judicial Commission can be done by establishing intensive communication between both of them and by improvement in legislation. Keywords : relation, Supreme Court, Judicial Commission   

scholarly journals ‘Not My Employee, Not My Liability’

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-49
Author(s):  
Carrie De Silva
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Practical Interest ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Body ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Vicarious Liability ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
The Law ◽  
Court Of Appeal

In April 2020, the Supreme Court in WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants [2020] and Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants [2020] overturned the decisions of the Court of Appeal in applying the law regarding vicarious liability of employees and others (and deciding in both cases that the defendant companies were not liable for the acts in question). The scope of responsibilities which the employment relationship brings, together with an awareness among many businesses of the classification worker, along with the more familiar employed/self-employed status, makes an examination of the outcomes and potential impact of these cases of wide, practical interest for those running businesses, large or small. The review concluded that there had been no dramatic change in the law but that the cases provide a measure of comfort to employers in something of a common-sense view being taken as to the scope of vicarious liability. They also add to the body of case law, helping to ensure that future issues can more clearly be reasoned out of court, with the detailed steer on the application of legal principles which a Supreme Court judgment provides.

Leading Decisions of the Supreme Court of Israel and Extracts of the Judgment

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 754-802 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Conditional Release ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
State Of Israel

Ganimat v. The State of Israel (1995) 49(iv) P.D. 589.The appellant was indicted in the Jerusalem Magistrate Court for two incidents of car theft. His detention was requested on the grounds that he posed a “danger to society”. The Magistrate Court agreed to his arrest, holding that a custom has been established whereby custody may be justified in crimes which have become “a nationwide scourge”, including car theft. The District Court rejected the appeal. The appellant was granted permission to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court (decision of Dorner J. and Barak J.; Cheshin J. dissenting) and his conditional release was ordered. However, it was decided to hold Special Proceedings in order to discuss some of the important issues raised by the case. The principal constitutional question raised by the case was whether the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty influences the interpretation of the existing law, in the present case, the law of arrest as regulated by the Law of Criminal Procedure.

scholarly journals CELAH INTERVENSI KEKUASAAN EKSEKUTIF TERHADAP KEKUASAAN YUDIKATIF DI LINGKUNGAN PERADILAN MILITER

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-216
Author(s):  
Aditya Wiguna Sanjaya
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Reform Era ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Military

Judicial power is one of the pillars supporting the establishment of a state, which ideally upholds the principle of independence so that it is independent and free from any influence of power, in the context of Indonesia the judicial power is carried out by a Supreme Court consisting of four judicial circles, namely general justice, religious court, the administrative court, military court and a Constitutional Court, in the course of the dynamics in the implementation of Judicial Power in Indonesia, which initially involved the organization, administration, and finance of the judicial body in relation to subordinate executive power, after the reform era had shifted under the Supreme Court, however, specifically for the military court there are still gaps in the potential for intervention from the executive power, which are caused by judges in the military court hierarchically there is still a command relationship with the TNI Commander and the President as the highest authority over the TNI. This will certainly have an influence on the independence of the military court as one of the executive branches of judicial power.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document