scholarly journals ANALISA HUKUM PEMBERIAN GRASI TERHADAP TERPIDANA KASUS KORUPSI GUBERNUR RIAU ANNAS MAAMUN

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-186
Author(s):  
Rai Iqsandri ◽  
Andrew Shandy Utama
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Corruption Case ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Republic

Clemency is a pardon in the form of changes, reductions, reductions, or abolition of the execution of a criminal offense granted by the President. Based on Article 14 Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, it is regulated that the President grants Clemency and Rehabilitation by taking into account the considerations of the Supreme Court. The granting of clemency by the president can have legal implications for the convict who applies for clemency. Decisions taken by the President, whether the decision to grant or reject the request for clemency, will not aggravate the sentence decided by the court. Convicts who get clemency will feel freedom because they can get out more quickly and are free from all obligations to undergo the punishment imposed on them. Although Law No. 22 of 2002 concerning Clemency does not regulate the prohibition of granting clemency to convicted corruption cases, the President should support the spirit of eradicating anti-corruption that has been echoed for a long time. With the granting of the petition for clemency against the convicted corruption case, the Governor of Riau, Annas Maamun, President Joko Widodo has hurt the feelings of the Indonesian people.

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 Analisis Yuridis Putusan Pengadilan Agama Kediri Nomor 0457/Pdt.G /2016/PA. Kdr Tentang Perkara Ekonomi Syari’ah

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-73
Author(s):  
Evi Nurvita Sari ◽  
Imam Annas Mushlihin ◽  
Abdullah Taufik
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Legal Counsel ◽  
Large Loss ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Case Number

Completion of the Syari'ah Economic case is the authority of the Religious Court as stated in Article 49 of Act Number 3 of 2006 concerning Judicial Power. This syari'ah economic case Number 0457 / Pdt.G / 2016 / PA.Kdr was submitted by a Syari'ah Bank customer who felt losing because collateral was auctioned by the Syari'ah Bank through the State Wealth and Auction Service Office (KPKNL). If the auction process is carried out, the customer as the Plaintiff will suffer a large loss. On this basis the plaintiff through his legal counsel filed a lawsuit to the Kediri Religious Court. This study used a qualitative approach with normative juridical analysis of the legal documents of the decision of the Kediri Religious Court. This thesis discusses how the basis of legal considerations, the claim of the plaintiffs was declared not accepted (niet ovankelijke verklaard) and the legal implications of the Decision of the Kediri Religious Court Number 0457 / Pdt.G / 2016 / PA.Kdr. The conclusion of the above writing is as follows: First, the basic legal considerations of the decision of the Kediri Religious Court Number 0457 / Pdt.G / 2016 / PA.Kdr are the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1149 / K / Sip / 1975 dated 17 April 1975 jo. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 565 / K / Sip / 1973 dated August 21, 1973, jo. verdict of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1149 / K / Sip / 1979 dated April 7, 1979 which states that the object of the claim is unclear, the claim cannot be accepted (niet ovankelijke verklaard). Second, the legal implications of the verdict are final and binding, judicially the ruling causes harm to the plaintiff, besides the principal case is not decided, the plaintiff is also burdened with court fees. Keywords: Juridical Analysis, Decision of the Religious Court, Syari'ah Economy.

scholarly journals ANOTASI PUTUSAN DISSENTING OPINION DALAM PUTUSAN KASASI

Asy-Syari ah ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-206
Author(s):  
Taufik Maulani
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Difference Of Opinion ◽  
Differences Of Opinion ◽  
The Gift ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Republic

Abstract: Judges 'decisions in court are the core of the parties' agreement. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 579/K/AG/2010 concerning Settlement of Inheritance Disputes. Trying out this research is trying to explain, is there a legal basis for differences of opinion in the judicial decision in Indonesia. The juridical-normative method was used in analyzing this study. Primary and secondary data sources from the decision of the Supreme Court, Jurisprudence Books and Legislation Regulations are sources of data in completing this research. The results showed first, the legal basis for the difference of opinion in the court's decision in Indonesia; secondly, the legal basis / consideration of the cassation panel of judges who reject the cassation filed by the parties in the decision Number: 579/K/AG/2010 is an unacceptable lawsuit because the cassation applicants are not the heirs who are experts and heirs who are trying exist in KHI regulated in Presidential Instruction Number 1 of 1991; and three, the legal implications of differences of opinion that proved positive as the judges' hard efforts in compiling the normative legal grounds and considerations, description, basis, and legal liability to take a fair decision, including the decision of cassation Number: 579/K/AG/ 2010 who refused to give heir to the heirs decided that the gift really took effect before the birth of KHI in 1991.Abstrak: Putusan hakim di pengadilan merupakan inti penyelesaian sengketa bagi pihak-pihak yang berperkara. Penelitian ini berfokus pada perbedaan pendapat (dissenting opinion) dalam Putusan Kasasi Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor: 579/K/AG/2010 tentang Penye­lesaian Sengketa Waris. Sehingga penelitian ini mencoba menjelaskan, apakah ada dasar hukum dissenting opinion dalam putusan penga­dilan di Indonesia. Metode yuridis-normatif digunakan dalam menganalisis penelitian ini. Sumber data primer dan sekunder dari putusan Mahkamah Agung, Kitab-kitab Fikih dan Peraturan Perundang-undangan menjadi sumber data dalam melengkapi penelitian ini. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pertama, dasar hukum kebo­lehan adanya dissenting opinion dalam putusan pengadilan di Indonesia; kedua, dasar/pertimbangan hukum majelis hakim kasasi yang menolak permohonan kasasi yang oleh para pihak dalam putusan Nomor: 579/K/AG/2010 adalah gugatan tidak dapat diterima karena para pihak pemohonan kasasi bukan para pihak ahli waris yang sebenarnya dan ahli waris pengganti baru ada dalam KHI yang diatur dalam Inpres Nomor 1 Tahun 1991; dan ketiga, implikasi hukum dari adanya dissenting opinion terbukti positif sebagai usaha keras para hakim dalam menyusun dasar dan pertimbangan hukum secara normatif, uraian, dasar, dan pertim­bangan hukum untuk mengambil sebuah putusan yang adil, termasuk pula putusan kasasi Nomor: 579/K/AG/2010 yang menolak memberikan harta waris kepada ahli waris pengganti sudah benar karena ketentuan itu belaku sebelum lahirnya KHI Tahun 1991.

scholarly journals Some psychological impacts on judging in criminal cases within the Supreme Court of Cassation of the Republic of Serbia

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 13-28
Author(s):  
Dragutin Avramović
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Psychological Impacts ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Media Pressure

Following hypothesis of Andrew Watson, American professor of Psychiatry and Law, the author analyses certain psychological impacts on behavior of judges and examines the relationship between their idiosyncrasies and their judicial decisions. The survey encompasses the judges of Criminal Department of the Supreme Court of Cassation of the Republic of Serbia and, also, for comparative reasons, the judges of Criminal Department of the First Basic Court in Belgrade. Considering the main issues there is no great discrepancy between answers given by the judges of the Supreme Court and those of the Basic Court. Most responses of the Serbian judges deviate from Watson's conclusions, namely: they do not admit that they feel frustrated due to heavy caseloads, the significant majority of judges are reluctant to acknowledge their prejudices and influence of biases on their ruling, the significant majority of judges are not burdened with the idea of possible misuse of their discretion, they nearly unanimously deny that public opinion and media pressure affect their rulings, etc. Generally, the judges in Serbia are not willing to admit that they cannot always overcome their own subjectivities.

scholarly journals Evoluzione della giurisprudenza costituzionale statunitense in materia d’aborto (II)

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Persano
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Single Case ◽  
The United States ◽  
Planned Parenthood ◽  
Abortion Debate ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Right ◽  
Roe V Wade

Negli Stati Uniti il dibattito sull’aborto è sempre un tema molto caldo. Questo saggio, diviso in due parti (la prima parte è stata pubblicata sul precedente numero della rivista) prova a ripercorrere l’evoluzione della giurisprudenza costituzionale statunitense in materia d’aborto, evidenziando i cambiamenti che ciascuna decisione ha apportato al quadro giuridico precedente. In questa seconda parte, la dissertazione sui singoli casi giurisprudenziali decisi dalla Suprema Corte prosegue con il caso Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Esso è stato una vera occasione mancata nella storia dell’aborto negli Stati Uniti, perchè venne sfiorata la overrule di Roe v. Wade. Ciononostante, venne sostanzialmente confermato l’impianto delle decisioni precedenti, in considerazione del fatto che una decisione contraria all’aborto avrebbe spiazzato un popolo che per decenni aveva organizzato la propria vita in funzione anche della possibilità di abortire. Con questa decisione si distinse la gravidanza in due periodi: quello della pre-viabilità, in cui la donna era completamente libera di abortire in accordo col medico; quello della post-viabilità, in cui gli Stati avrebbero potuto legiferare, pur dovendo consentire l’aborto nel caso di pericolo per la vita o la salute della madre. Inoltre il diritto d’aborto venne radicato nella libertà riconosciuta nel XIV Emendamento della Costituzione. Nel successivo caso Stenberg v. Carhart fu oggetto di giudizio l’aborto a nascita parziale: una legge del Nebraska aveva bandito questa pratica, ma la legge fu annullata dalla Corte Suprema, nonostante il duro dissenso di ben quattro giudici, fra cui Anthony Kennedy. Successivamente a questa decisione, il Congresso prese l’iniziativa di emanare il Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Questa legge fu impugnata in via d’azione davanti alla Corte Suprema e ne scaturì la sentenza Gonzalez v. Carhart. In questa decisione la Corte fece un passo indietro rispetto a Stenberg, affermò la legittimità del bando, sostenne che l’aborto a nascita parziale non è mai necessario per tutelare la vita della donna e che Stenberg era fondato su convinzioni erronee sul punto. Il saggio si conclude con delle interessanti considerazioni in merito ai possibili sviluppi futuri circa il tema dell’aborto negli Stati Uniti, auspica la “liberalizzazione del diritto alla vita” ed avanza una originale proposta, valida per tutti i Paesi in cui l’aborto è legalizzato. ---------- Abortion debate is always a hot subject in the United States. This essay, divided into two parts (the first part has been published on the previous issue of this review) tries to go along the development of U.S. constitutional caselaw about abortion, pointing out the change that each judgement caused to the previous law framework. In this second part, the dissertation about U.S. Supreme Court single case-law goes on by Planned Parenthood v. Casey. It was a real missed occasion in the abortion affair in the United States, because it was on the verge of overruling Roe v. Wade. However, the framework of the previous cases was substantially confirmed, considering that a decision against abortion would place out people who for a long time organized their own life in connection to the right of abortion. By this judgement, pregnancy was divided into two periods: pre-viability, when woman was completely free to have an abortion in agreement with her doctor; post-viability, when States could restrict abortion, except for woman life or health risks. Moreover, abortion right was founded on liberty, acknowledged by XIV Amendement. In the following case Gonzalez v. Carhart, partial-birth abortion was judged: a statute of Nebraska banned this activity, but it was stroked down by Supreme Court, despite of the dissenting opinion of four judges (Anthony Kennedy was one of them). After this judgement, the Congress wanted to issue Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. This statute was pre-enforcement challenged to the Supreme Court, and Gonzalez v. Carhart was poured. In this judgment, the Court drew back Stenberg, it stated the ban was legitimate, partial-birth abortion never is necessary to safeguard woman health, and Stenberg was founded on wrong beliefs on this matter. This essay concludes with interesting considerations about possible developments about abortion affair in the United States, wishes “liberty of right to life” and proposes a solution for all the countries where abortion is legal.

scholarly journals Pravni položaj poštenog i nepoštenog posjednika u odnosu na vlasnika stvari

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 527-543
Author(s):  
Jadranko Jug
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Basic Method ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Basic Characteristics ◽  
The Right

This paper deals with the problems related to the legal position of honest and dishonest possessors in relation to the owner of things, that is, it analyses the rights belonging to the possessors of things and the demands that possessors may require from the owners of things to whom the possessors must submit those things. Also, in contrast, the rights and requirements are analysed of the owners of things in relation to honest and dishonest possessors. In practice, a dilemma arises in defi ning the essential and benefi cial expenditure incurred by honest possessors, what the presumptions are for and until when the right of retention may be exercised for the sake of remuneration of that expenditure, when the statute of limitations expires on that claim, and the signifi cance of the provisions of the Civil Obligations Act in relation to unjust enrichment, management without mandate and the right of retention, and which provisions regulate these or similar issues. The answers to some of these dilemmas have been provided in case law, and therefore the basic method used in the paper was analysis and research of case law, especially decisions by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia. The introduction to the paper provides the basic characteristics of the concept of possession and possession of things, and the type and quality of possession, to provide a basis for the subsequent analysis of the legal position of the possessor of a thing in relation to the owner of that thing.

scholarly journals ANALISIS PENYELESIAN SENGKETA INTERNAL LEMBAGA NEGARA (STUDI KASUS PELANTIKAN PIMPINAN DEWAN PERWAKILAN DAERAH REPUBLIK INDONESIA PERIODE 2017-2019)

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 364
Author(s):  
Yanzah Bagas Nugraha ◽  
Dwi Andayani Budisetyowati
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
State Institution ◽  
The State ◽  
The Body ◽  
Internal Conflict ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Leadership Tenure ◽  
The People ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic

The establishment of the Regional Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia so called Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD-RI) at least has two objectives. The first is to enhance justice for the people in the region. Secondly, to expanding and increasing the participation of local communities in national life. The process to form this state institution is done by amending the 3rd amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic Indonesia. However, in doing that  amendment there was an internal conflict within the body of DPD-RI involving the old and the new leaders of this institution last year. The length of leadership tenure which was initially made 5 years was amended to became 2.5 years. The different length of leadership tenure was then canceled by the Supreme Court and it was decided to be the same as other institution such as The People’s Consultative Assembly and The House of Representative in that the leadership tenure should be in accordance with the electoral cycle of 5 years. However, although the regulation of DPD-RI has been canceled, the Supreme Court keeps sending its representative to guide the oath of position of the new DPD-RI leadership. The only regulation that has been introduced by the state was regulation toward conflict between state institutions and this conflict can merely be resolved by the Constitutional Court. Therefore, there is an urgent need for the state to seek solution to solve this problem to prevent the same thing happened to other state institution in the future.

Evolution of the Roman Republican Senate: Composition, Election, and Judicial functions (Part 1)

2021 ◽  
pp. 62-77
Author(s):  
L. L. Kofanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Significant Part ◽  
Supreme Council ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The World ◽  
Judicial Authority ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Gradual Transformation

The paper deals with the Roman senatus in the period from 5th to 3rd century BC, from the point of view of its composition, completion and selected competences. As to its composition, in the most arcaic times of the Roman state, the senate was an assembly of the heads of clans (patres gentium), who represented the ideas of patricians. The autor presents gradual transformation of the composition of the senate and switch towards the inclusion of the plebeians. It describes also the process of the cooptation of the members, rules of which incurred fundamental changes from the hereditary principles to the regulation given by statutes. A significant part of the article is devoted to the judicial functions of the Senate and the relationship between the iudicium senatus and the iudicium populi, the transformation of the Senate court from a regional body to the highest, global court of the entire Mediterranean. It’s noted that if the original Roman Senate de iure was the judicial authority only one of the Latin Confederation, later after 338 BC, it becomes the Supreme court of the Latin Union, and by the end of the Republic is transformed into the «Supreme Council of the world».

scholarly journals The Settlement of Boundary Disputes Through Testing of Legislation in Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 01003
Author(s):  
Suparto ◽  
Rahdiansyah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Regional Autonomy ◽  
Boundary Disputes ◽  
Legal Principle ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Government ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

Boundary dispute is a new phenomenon that occurred in the era of regional autonomy followed by the expansion of the region. One of them occurred between Kepulauan Riau and Jambi Provinces related to Berhala Island ownership. Settlement of disputes between these two provinces took quite a long time and also caused tensions between two provinces. Actually, the government through the Ministry of Home Affairs has issued a regulation to solve the boundary problem of this area namely the Minister of Home Affairs Regulation No.1 in 2006 and No. 76 in 2012 on Guidelines for Confirmation of the Boundaries, however, is still less effective because although it has been done in such a way the party who feels aggrieved still take another way that is by testing the legislation to the Supreme Court or Mahkamah Konstitusional (Constitutional Court). An example is the boundary dispute between Kepulauan Riau and Jambi Province which was resolved through the examination of legislation to the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. In the case, there were 3 decisions, namely Supreme Court Decision No.49P/HUM/2011, Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 32/PUU-X/2012 and the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 62/PUU-X/2012. Based on the research results obtained as follows 1). Implementation of the principle or legal principle of lex posterior derogat lex priori by the Supreme Court 2). The decision of the Supreme Court was taken into consideration in the decision of the Constitutional Court 3). The cause of the territorial boundary disputes between Kepulauan Riau Province and Jambi Province was the synchronization of 3 related laws namely Indonesian Law no. 31 in 2003, Law no. 25 in 2002 and Law no. 54 of 1999.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document