scholarly journals Berhukum Secara Objektif Pada Kasus Baiq Nuril: Suatu Telaah Filsafat Hukum Melalui Kajian Paradigmatik

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 187
Author(s):  
Aditya Yuli Sulistyawan
Keyword(s):  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Legal Issue ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Telephone Conversation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Legal Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law

<p>Belakangan ini. kasus Baiq Nuril benar-benar menyita perhatian publik. Kasus hukum ini bermula saat Nuril yang saat itu masih bekerja sebagai pegawai honorer di SMAN 17 Mataram, merekam percakapan telepon Kepala Sekolah kepadanya yang berkonten kesusilaan dan bernada melecehkan dirinya. Singkat cerita, melalui rekannya, rekaman pembicaraan tersebut tersebar. Nuril pun dilaporkan atas sangkaan Pasal 27 (1) Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (ITE). Proses hukum bergulir, Pengadilan Negeri Mataram memberikan vonis bebas kepada Nuril. Namun, Penuntut Umum mengajukan kasasi dan Mahkamah Agung akhirnya memvonis Nuril bersalah dengan hukuman pidana penjara 6 bulan kurungan dan denda lima ratus juta rupiah. Inilah yang kemudian memunculkan polemik. Masyarakat memprotes putusan yang dianggapnya tidak adil tersebut. Kekecewaan masyarakat kepada hukum sangat terasa melalui berbagai gerakan untuk membela Nuril, baik melalui penggalangan dana maupun aksi demonstrasi. Mereka kecewa kepada hukum yang nyatanya malah memberi hukuman pada seorang korban pelecehan seksual. Berbagai persepsi buruk terhadap hukum bermunculan, masyarakat ramai memberi pandangan awam mereka terhadap kasus ini. Secara ilmiah, kasus ini semestinya dapat diuraikan dengan jelas melalui ilmu hukum, terlebih melalui filsafat hukum. Adalah tugas kita sebagai akademisi untuk menguraikan setiap duduk peristiwa kasus menjadi lebih terang, agar tidak menimbulkan kesesatan berpikir di masyarakat. Berdasarkan uraian ini, penulis akan menjawab permasalahan mengenai bagaimanakah cara berhukum objektif yang diterapkan dalam kasus ini, serta bagaimana telaah filsafat hukum melalui kajian paradigma akan menguraikan persoalan hukum ini. Pembahasan akan dijabarkan dalam paradigma penulis yakni paradigma konstruktivisme dan melalui metode hermenutikal/dialektikal.</p><p><em>Recently, the Baiq Nuril case really caught the public's attention. This legal case began when Nuril, who at that time was still working as a temporary employee at the SMAN 17 Mataram, recorded the principal's telephone conversation with him who was in decency and insulted him. Long story short, through his colleague, the recording of the conversation was spread. Nuril was reported on the suspicion of Article 27 (1) of the Electronic Information and Transaction Law (ITE). The legal process was rolling, the Mataram District Court gave Nuril a free verdict. However, the Public Prosecutor filed an appeal and the Supreme Court finally sentenced Nuril guilty to a sentence of 6 months imprisonment and a fine of five hundred million rupiah. This is what later led to the polemic. The community protested the decision which he considered unfair. The people's disappointment in the law was felt through various movements to defend Nuril, both through fundraising and demonstrations. They are disappointed in the law which in fact actually punishes a victim of sexual abuse. Various bad perceptions of the law have sprung up, people are busy giving their lay views on this case. Scientifically, this case should be clearly explained through legal science, especially through legal philosophy. It is our duty as academics to elaborate on each sitting the case of the case becomes brighter, so as not to cause an error in thinking in society. Based on this description, the author will answer the problem of how the objective legal method applied in this case, and how the study of legal philosophy through the study of paradigms will describe this legal issue. The discussion will be elaborated in the author's paradigm of the constructivism paradigm and through the hermenutical / dialectical method.</em></p>

scholarly journals Berhukum Secara Objektif Pada Kasus Baiq Nuril: Suatu Telaah Filsafat Hukum Melalui Kajian Paradigmatik

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 187
Author(s):  
Aditya Yuli Sulistyawan
Keyword(s):  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Legal Issue ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Telephone Conversation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Legal Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law

<p>Belakangan ini. kasus Baiq Nuril benar-benar menyita perhatian publik. Kasus hukum ini bermula saat Nuril yang saat itu masih bekerja sebagai pegawai honorer di SMAN 17 Mataram, merekam percakapan telepon Kepala Sekolah kepadanya yang berkonten kesusilaan dan bernada melecehkan dirinya. Singkat cerita, melalui rekannya, rekaman pembicaraan tersebut tersebar. Nuril pun dilaporkan atas sangkaan Pasal 27 (1) Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (ITE). Proses hukum bergulir, Pengadilan Negeri Mataram memberikan vonis bebas kepada Nuril. Namun, Penuntut Umum mengajukan kasasi dan Mahkamah Agung akhirnya memvonis Nuril bersalah dengan hukuman pidana penjara 6 bulan kurungan dan denda lima ratus juta rupiah. Inilah yang kemudian memunculkan polemik. Masyarakat memprotes putusan yang dianggapnya tidak adil tersebut. Kekecewaan masyarakat kepada hukum sangat terasa melalui berbagai gerakan untuk membela Nuril, baik melalui penggalangan dana maupun aksi demonstrasi. Mereka kecewa kepada hukum yang nyatanya malah memberi hukuman pada seorang korban pelecehan seksual. Berbagai persepsi buruk terhadap hukum bermunculan, masyarakat ramai memberi pandangan awam mereka terhadap kasus ini. Secara ilmiah, kasus ini semestinya dapat diuraikan dengan jelas melalui ilmu hukum, terlebih melalui filsafat hukum. Adalah tugas kita sebagai akademisi untuk menguraikan setiap duduk peristiwa kasus menjadi lebih terang, agar tidak menimbulkan kesesatan berpikir di masyarakat. Berdasarkan uraian ini, penulis akan menjawab permasalahan mengenai bagaimanakah cara berhukum objektif yang diterapkan dalam kasus ini, serta bagaimana telaah filsafat hukum melalui kajian paradigma akan menguraikan persoalan hukum ini. Pembahasan akan dijabarkan dalam paradigma penulis yakni paradigma konstruktivisme dan melalui metode hermenutikal/dialektikal.</p><pre><em>Recently, the Baiq Nuril case really caught the public's attention. This legal case began when Nuril, who at that time was still working as a temporary employee at the </em><em>SMAN 17 </em><em>Mataram, recorded the principal's telephone conversation with him who was in decency and insulted him. Long story short, through his colleague, the recording of the conversation was spread. Nuril was reported on the suspicion of Article 27 (1) of the Electronic Information and Transaction Law (ITE). The legal process was rolling, the Mataram District Court gave Nuril a free verdict. However, the Public Prosecutor filed an appeal and the Supreme Court finally sentenced Nuril guilty to a sentence of 6 months imprisonment and a fine of five hundred million rupiah. This is what later led to the polemic. The community protested the decision which he considered unfair. The people's disappointment in the law was felt through various movements to defend Nuril, both through fundraising and demonstrations. They are disappointed in the law which in fact actually punishes a victim of sexual abuse. Various bad perceptions of the law have sprung up, people are busy giving their lay views on this case. Scientifically, this case should be clearly explained through legal science, especially through legal philosophy. It is our duty as academics to elaborate on each sitting the case of the case becomes brighter, so as not to cause an error in thinking in society. Based on this description, the author will answer the problem of how the objective legal method applied in this case, and how the study of legal philosophy through the study of paradigms will describe this legal issue. The discussion will be elaborated in the author's paradigm of the constructivism paradigm and through the hermenutical / dialectical method.</em><em></em></pre>

scholarly journals ANALISIS PUTUSAN NOMOR 574K/PID.SUS/2018 MENGENAI PELANGGARAN PASAL 27 AYAT (1) UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 11 TAHUN 2008 TENTANG INFORMASI DAN TRANSAKSI ELEKTRONIK

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1335
Author(s):  
Pelemon Siagian ◽  
Sugandi Ishak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
General Public ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Electronic Transactions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law

Baiq Nuril Maknun is accused of violating Article 27 paragraph (1) of Law Number 11 Year 2008 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions (UU ITE). In the Mataram District Court found not proven guilty, the Public Prosecutor filed an appeal with Decision Number 574K / Pid. Sus / 2018 and the Supreme Court (MA) sentenced him guilty to Baiq Nuril Maknun with 6 month prisons sentence and a Rp. 500 million. Baiq Nuril Maknun then submitted a Review (PK) with Decision Number 83PK / Pid.Sus / 2019 and the Supreme Court rejected the PK proposed by Baiq Nuril Maknun. Method research used in writing this thesis is normative legal research. The results showed that Baiq Nuril Maknun submitted an amnesty request to President Joko Widodo and was granted, Baiq Nuril Maknun was free from the snares of the law. Submission of amnesty must be selective and for certain cases that are felt by the general public, the court's decision must be able to reflect justice because it is in accordance with the Judicial Act and the Supreme Court, and judges are required to explore the values of justice in society.

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 PEMIDANAAN TERHADAP PERBUATAN MENGHILANGKAN MAYAT YANG DILAKUKAN ANAK (STUDI TERHADAP PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO. 774K / PID.SUS / 2015)

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 636
Author(s):  
Heppi Florensia ◽  
Mety Rahmawati
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Supreme Court Ruling ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Criminalization of the offender especially in the perpetrators of children under age is as a sanction that tells implied to someone who performs acts meet certain conditions. Often in prosecuting a criminal case the Public Prosecutor is wrong in deciding what articles should be imposed on the perpetrator. As one case of Supreme Court verdict No.774K/PID.SUS/2015 with 16-year-old defendant Dicky Pranata prosecuted by the Prosecutor with Article 340 of the Penal Code juncto Article 56 of the Criminal Code is a criminal act of premeditated murder, in which the elements of Article 340 of the Criminal Code are not fulfilled the defendant's self but the existence of other crimes Article 181 of the Criminal Code of disappearance committed by the defendant. The defendant was sentenced to 10 years in prison at the District Court, while the defendant was released from the sentence of the Court of Appeal and Cassation. The problem in this research is whether the act of the perpetrator fulfills the elements in Article 340 juncto Article 56 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code juncto Article 1 paragraph (3) SPPA Act and Article 181 of the Criminal Code? How to base criminal offenses in the Supreme Court ruling case No.774K/PID.SUS/2015? The researcher examines the problem with normative juridical method. Based on the analysis result that the defendant is not proven to commit element of crime Article 340 KUHP, but the existence of criminal act Article 181 of Criminal Code which has been done by defendant.

TINJAUAN YURIDIS MENGENAI TINDAK PIDANA YANG DITUNTUT DENGAN PASAL 351 (3) KUHP STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN MA NO. 1043 K/PID/2016

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-62
Author(s):  
Rahmat Saputra
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court

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

scholarly journals Analisis Kebijakan Rehabilitasi Narkotika Terhadap Pecandu dan Korban Penyalahgunaan Narkotika di Batam

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
Junimart Girsang ◽  
Beny Kaissar Simanjuntak
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Legal Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Justice Reform ◽  
The Law ◽  
Illicit Trafficking ◽  
Legal Processes

In the year 2017, Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR) found in the Surabaya District Court, the majority of the pleas of the Public Prosecutor for the accused as addicts and victims of narcotics abuse for convicting prison were 90% (ninety percent) and 10% (ten percent) are terminated by the imposition of narcotics rehabilitation as an attempted conviction. Therefore, this research was conducted in Batam city as one of the regions with high levels of narcotics illicit trafficking. The purpose of this study is to find out the procedures for implementing narcotic rehabilitation, to analyze the effectiveness of the law in the application of narcotic rehabilitation for addicts and victims of narcotics abuses in Batam City, and to measure the level of justice in providing penalization for addicts and victims of narcotics abusers processed through court verdicts. This research was carried out by conducting empirical legal research at the Riau Islands Police Narcotics Directorate, BNN Riau Islands Province, Batam District Court, and Batam BNN Rehabilitation Atelier. The results of this study state that in applying narcotic rehabilitation to addicts and victims of narcotics abuse can be made through voluntary and through legal processes (compulsory). The implementation of narcotics rehabilitation for narcotics addicts and victims of narcotics abuses in Batam City is not effective and the level of justice in providing criminal sentences for addicts and victims of narcotics abusers who through the legal process is felt to be unfair.

scholarly journals AKIBAT HUKUM TERHADAP PUTUSAN BEBAS (VRIJSPRAAK) BAGI WARGA NEGARA ASING (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar Nomor 748/Pid.Sus/2016/PN DPS)

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 323
Author(s):  
Ida Ayu Nyoman Sri Candra Purnami
Keyword(s):  
Positive Impact ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Legal Cases ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Legal Immigration ◽  
Legal Consequences

The high flow of globalization and the easiness of obtaining visas for foreign citizens can increase the income of a country engaged in tourism. This phenomenon does not always have a positive impact for the country of Indonesia because many foreigners were found residing in the territory of Indonesia without having a valid and legal immigration stay permit. Many of these foreign citizens were convicted legal cases in Indonesia, it is therefore necessary to study the legal consequences of the free judgment for the foreign citizens. This study was conducted to examine the legal basis for the imposition of free judgment against foreign citizens and the implementation of the Denpasar District Court Decision Number 748/Pid.Sus/2016/PN DPS on the free judgment against a foreign citizen. This study is an empirical juridical study that examines the legal consequences caused after the abolition of free judgment on foreigner (Case study of Denpasar District Court No. 748/ Pid.Sus / 2016 / PN DPS). Based on the result of this study, was found that according to Law Number 8 Year 1981 regarding Criminal Procedure Law and law of the republic of Indonesia Number 6 Year 2011 on Immigration, foreigners who live in the territory of the Republic of Indonesia who do not have a valid and legal immigration stay permit can be given immigration administrative action in the form of detention. Whereas foreign citizens who are secured and still hold immigration stay permit until the completion of the judicial process and  given free judgment, the foreigners may remain in the territory of the Republic of Indonesia until the validity period of their stay permit expires. Meanwhile, for foreign citizens who have been subjected to free judgment and still hold immigration permit, the Public Prosecutor may request the Immigration Civil Service Investigator to perform the act of detention to those foreign citizens. Tingginya arus globalisasi dan kemudahan memperoleh visa bagi warga negara asing dapat meningkatkan pendapatan suatu negara yang bergerak dalam bidang kepariwisataan. Fenomena ini tidak selalu berdampak positif bagi negara Indonesia karena banyak ditemukan orang asing yang berada di wilayah Indonesia tidak memiliki izin tinggal keimigrasian yang sah dan masih berlaku. Banyak  diantara warga negara asing tersebut tersandung kasus hukum di Negara Indonesia, sehingga perlu dikaji akibat hukum yang ditimbulkan atas Putusan Bebas bagi warga negara asing tersebut. Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengkaji dasar hukum penjatuhan putusan bebas terhadap warga negara asing dan pelaksanaan Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar Nomor 748/Pid.Sus/2016/PN DPS atas putusan bebas terhadap seorang warganegara asing. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis empiris yang mengkaji akibat hukum yang ditimbulkan setelah dijatuhkannya Putusan Bebas terhadap orang asing (Studi kasus terhadap Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar Nomor 748/Pid.Sus/2016/PN DPS). Berdasarkan hasil penelitian ini ditemukan bahwa menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 Tentang Hukum Acara Pidana dan Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 6 Tahun 2011 Tentang Keimigrasian, orang asing yang tinggal di wilayah Negara Republik Indonesia yang tidak memiliki izin tinggal keimigrasian yang sah dan berlaku dapat dilakukan Tindakan Administratif Keimigrasian berupa pendetensian.  Sedangkan warga negara asing yang saat diamankan dan hingga proses peradilan selesai masih memiliki izin tinggal keimigrasian dan dijatuhi putusan bebas, maka orang asing tersebut dapat tetap tinggal di wilayah Negara Republik Indonesia hingga masa berlaku izin tinggalnya habis. Sementara bagi orang warga negara asing yang telah dijatuhi putusan bebas dan masih memiliki izin tinggal keimigrasian namun oleh Penuntut Umum dilakukan upaya hukum kasasi, Penuntut Umum dapat meminta kepada Penyidik Pegawai Negeri Sipil Keimigrasian untuk melakukan tindakan pendetensian atas warga negara asing tersebut.

scholarly journals We Can Thank Harvey Weinstein for Doing What Congress and the Supreme Court Failed to Do

2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 174-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Sherwyn ◽  
Paul Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Social Movements ◽  
Sexual Harassment ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Popular Press ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law

While the years 2017 and 2018 will be remembered for numerous geo political and social movements, any retrospective of this time will include the issue of sexual harassment and the corresponding “Me Too” movement. In this time, sexual harassment has transformed from a workplace legal concept to an issue that is defining the fabric of the country. While no one could persuasively argue that sexual harassment has not expanded from its legal roots to a movement that transcends the law, the fact is that the concept is rooted and adjudicated in law. Sadly, the commentators and the popular press often ignore or misstate the law. This creates a dangerous culture where the public is misinformed of their rights and responsibilities. More troubling, is the fact that there are serious problems with the law that need to be understand and, we contend, changed, in order for the entire problem to be eliminated, or, at least, mitigated. This paper explains the law with regard to what constitutes sexual harassment and when the employer is liable, identifies the problems, and proposes a fix so that we can create a future workplace where the authors’ five daughters (between them) and the rest of their generation will be able to honestly not raise their hands and not have to say: “Me Too!”

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 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document