scholarly journals Verdict Prison For Drug Abuse

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 365
Author(s):  
Fahmi Reza
Keyword(s):  
Drug Abuse ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Drug Addicts ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Social Rehabilitation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Younger Generation

Drug abuse crime is becoming increasingly widespread, especially among the younger generation where the younger generation is the main pillar of a nation that can endanger the survival of the nation in the future. There is a difference of perception between law enforcement regarding the criminalization of the offenses related to drug abuse convictions were deemed less appropriate prison committed against to drugs. Scriptwriting non study was conducted using literature study using laws in Act No. 35 of 2009 challenged the Narcotics and the Supreme Court Circular No. 4 of 2010placement of abuse, abusers and drug addicts into rehabilitation institute of medical and social rehabilitation. The conclusion of this script writing is that the administration of prison sentences against offenders in this respect addicts who are victims of drug abuse should not be done and prioritize rehabilitation verdict.Keywords: Verdict Prison; Drug Abuse; Rehabilitation.

scholarly journals PENYELESAIAN PERSELISIHAN HASIL PEMILIHAN KEPALA DAERAH PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO. 97/PUU-XI.2013

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
Indra Hendrawan
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Law ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism ◽  
Regional Leaders

Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 tentang Penetapan Perpu Nomor 1 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati dan Walikota Menjadi Undang-Undang mengamanatkan Mahkamah Agung sebagai lembaga yang berwenang menyelesaikan perselisihan hasil pemilihan kepala daerah. Namun tanpa sempat diimplementasikan, Undang-Undang tersebut telah direvisi kembali melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015 dengan melimpahkan penyelesaian perselisihan hasil pemilihan ke badan peradilan khusus. Perubahan Undang-Undang secara cepat tersebut telah menimbulkan pertanyaan, kemanakah arah kebijakan penyelesaian perselisihan di masa mendatang? Dengan pendekatan yuridis normative, tulisan ini mencoba menguraikan refleksi penyelesaian perselisihan di Mahkamah Agung ataupun Mahkamah Konstitusi selama satu dasawarsa terakhir untuk mendapatkan penanganan ideal yang harus dilakukan dalam rangka perbaikan penanganan perselisihan hasil pemilihan kepala daerah di masa mendatang. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penempatan hakim-hakim yang berintegritas, mumpuni serta yang mengedepankan keadilan substantif dalam penyelesaian perselisihan merupakan hal mutlak yang harus dilakukan. Selain itu, perbaikan juga tidak cukup hanya pada tahap penanganan perselisihan hasil saja, perlu pula ada optimalisasi penegakan hukum di tahap-tahap sebelumnya yang dilakukan oleh KPU, Bawaslu/Panwaslu, DKPP ataupun penegak hukum lainnya.<p>Law No. 1 of 2015 on Enactment of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 concerning the election of Governor, the Regent and Mayor Become Law mandates the Supreme Court as an authorized institution to settle disputes about electoral result from the local election for regional leaders. However, without a chance to be implemented, the Law has been revised by Law No. 8 of 2015 in which any disputes that arise from the results of the election are delegated to a special judicial body. The ammendment has raised question, to where the policy of dispute resolution will be directed in the future? Using normative juridical approach, this paper tries to elaborate the reflection of dispute resolution in the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court during the last decade to find out ideal treatment should be applied in order to improve the dispute resolution mechanism in the future. So, the placement of judges who have integrity, capability, and put the substantive fairness in the dispute resolution is absolute term. In addition, the improvement is not enough in just handling the dispute resolution stage, there should also be optimizing of the the law enforcement in the earlier stages that were carried out by the General Election Commission, Bawaslu/Panwaslu, DKPP or other law enforcement bodies.</p>

The UK courts and EU law post-Brexit

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. Christopher-Vajda
Author(s):  
Christopher Vajda
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Following the expiry on 31 December 2020 of the ‘transition period’ under the UK/EU Withdrawal Agreement, the relationship between UK and EU law had changed. Whilst much EU legislation at that date will continue to apply in UK law as ‘retained EU law’ and judgments of the EU courts handed down before that date will remain binding on UK courts as ‘retained EU case law’, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can depart from that case law. Whilst EU court judgments handed down after that date are not binding on UK courts, they may be taken into account. This article considers both the status of EU retained case law and when the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal may depart from it, and the future of EU law that is not ‘retained EU case law’ and how judgments of the European Courts and national courts of its Member States may influence UK judges in the future.

scholarly journals MENGGALI ‘ILLAT HUKUM PERBEDAAN AGAMA SEBAGAI HALANGAN WARIS

EMPIRISMA ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Isna Wahyudi
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Legal Reason ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Religious Courts

Kompilasi Hukum Islam does not regulate interfaith inheritance distinctly. It only requires the testator and the heirs have the same religion. At court, judges of religious courts employ obligatory bequest (waṣiat wājibah) to divide inheritance to non-Muslim heirs, based on jurisprudence of the Supreme Court Number 368 K/AG/1995. As the result, different faith still become hindrance for Muslim and non-Muslim to inherit each other due to law enforcement without considering the legal reasoning (ratio legis) of the law. In this case, it is important to investigate the legal reason (ratio legis) of the hadith that prohibits the interfaith inheritance as this article tries to do. To do the investigation, the author employs Islamic legal theories (uṣūl fikih) and hermeneutics approach. As the result, the author comes to the conclusion that the ratio legis of the hadith that prohibits the interfaith inheritance is due to hostility and crime element and not due to different faith. Keywords: Interfaith Inheritance, Ratio Legis, Equality

scholarly journals The Contractual Interpretation of Tipping J

2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 227
Author(s):  
Matthew Barber
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Comprehensive Examination ◽  
The Future ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Way

In the Supreme Court decision of Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd, Tipping J put forward an approach to contact interpretation that, while indebted to that of Lord Hoffmann, was expressed differently and promoted the use of evidence of prior negotiations. Despite not gaining the support of any of the other sitting judges, this approach was swiftly taken up in the lower courts and, until recently at least, seems to have been accepted as representing New Zealand law. This article attempts a comprehensive examination of Tipping J’s approach. It concludes that, while coherent in principle, the detail of the approach is flawed in a number of ways, especially the way in which evidence of subsequent conduct is assumed to work. The future of Tipping J’s approach is considered.

The Origins of the Re Hastings-Bass Rule

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ashdown
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Present State ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Future Application ◽  
Precise Nature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Many ◽  
Court Of Appeal

The present state of the law must now be treated as authoritatively set out by Lord Walker in Pitt v Holt, and to a lesser but still important extent by the earlier judgment of Lloyd LJ in the Court of Appeal in the same case. This chapter, however, is concerned with the earlier development of the Re Hastings-Bass doctrine. Its purpose is to establish the doctrinal legitimacy of the rule in Re Hastings-Bass as an aspect of the English law of trusts. Whilst this is primarily of academic and theoretical concern, in view of the Supreme Court’s reformulation of the law into its present shape, it is also of practical importance. In particular, the future application of the doctrine to novel situations will depend upon understanding the precise nature and scope of the rule propounded by the Supreme Court. That decision cannot simply be divorced from the many decided cases which preceded it, and from its place in the wider compass of the law of trusts.

In Scalia’s Shadow

Never Trump ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 197-220
Author(s):  
Robert P. Saldin ◽  
Steven M. Teles
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
First Choice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Total Lack ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Trump Administration

This chapter explores the creation of Checks and Balances, a new group of conservative legal critics of the Trump administration. From his racist attack on the federal district judge ruling on the Trump University case and suspicions that he would appoint his own sister to the Supreme Court, to his threats to revise libel law so as to silence his rivals and his nearly total lack of constitutional discussion, Donald Trump was almost no prominent conservative lawyer's first choice. Once he dispatched all his Republican rivals, however, conservative lawyers were in a quandary. The death of Antonin Scalia, the most celebrated conservative jurist of his generation and a leader of the conservative legal movement, put the future of the Supreme Court squarely on the ballot. Once the character of Trump's governance became clear, Checks and Balances emerged to criticize the administration's legal conduct.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document