Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal SENTRI: Jurnal Riset Ilmiah Jurnal Pustaka Cendekia Hukum dan Ilmu Sosial
I Gede Hartadi Kurniawan
Universitas Esa Unggul
Religion Aerospace Engineering Arts Humanities Computer Science & IT Economics, Econometrics & Finance Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Nasabah Bank Akibat Phishing (Analisis Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan Nomor 460/PID.SUS/2025/PN JKT.SEL): Penelitian Muhamad Robby Dharmawan; Joko Widarto; I Gede Hartadi Kurniawan
Jurnal Pustaka Cendekia Hukum dan Ilmu Sosial Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): Jurnal Pustaka Cendekia Hukum dan Ilmu Sosial Volume 4 Nomor 1 February - May 2
Publisher : PT PUSTAKA CENDEKIA GROUP

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.70292/pchukumsosial.v4i1.412

Abstract

Perkembangan layanan perbankan digital memberikan kemudahan dan efisiensi transaksi bagi nasabah, tetapi pada saat yang sama menimbulkan risiko hukum berupa phishing yang merugikan nasabah. Artikel ini menganalisis perlindungan hukum terhadap nasabah bank sebagai korban phishing serta wujud upaya preventif bank dalam meningkatkan keamanan layanan perbankan digital. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, kasus, dan konseptual. Putusan yang dianalisis ialah Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan Nomor 460/Pid.Sus/2025/PN JKT.SEL, yaitu perkara penyebaran SMS phishing menggunakan perangkat Fake BTS dan aplikasi KKCSMS. Pesan phishing tersebut seolah-olah berasal dari Bank Central Asia (BCA), UOB, dan HSBC, kemudian mengarahkan nasabah ke domain palsu untuk memasukkan data pribadi dan finansial seperti nomor kartu kredit, CVV, PIN, dan OTP. Hasil penelitian memperlihatkan bahwa perlindungan hukum terhadap nasabah harus dibangun melalui penegakan hukum pidana, pelindungan data pribadi, perlindungan konsumen, dan prinsip kehati-hatian perbankan. Dalam kerangka Rechtsstaat, negara dan lembaga jasa keuangan wajib menjamin kepastian hukum, perlindungan preventif, serta pemulihan yang efektif bagi korban. Bank wajib memperkuat keamanan digital melalui manajemen risiko teknologi informasi, deteksi fraud, edukasi nasabah, pemantauan domain palsu, penanganan pengaduan secara cepat, serta koordinasi dengan regulator dan aparat penegak hukum. Dengan demikian, perlindungan hukum bagi korban phishing tak cukup hanya melalui pemidanaan pelaku, namun juga harus mencakup kewajiban preventif bank sebagai penyelenggara layanan keuangan digital.
Urgensi Pengesahan Undang-undang Perampasan Aset dalam Penegakan Hukum di Indonesia (Studi Putusan Nomor 1277 PK/PID.SUS/2024) Ummu Faizah; I Gede Hartadi Kurniawan
SENTRI: Jurnal Riset Ilmiah Vol. 5 No. 2 (2026): SENTRI : Jurnal Riset Ilmiah, Februari 2026
Publisher : LPPM Institut Pendidikan Nusantara Global

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55681/sentri.v5i2.5678

Abstract

Economic crimes, particularly corruption and money laundering, are systemic crimes that cause significant state losses and undermine public trust in legal institutions in Indonesia. The increasing complexity of these crimes, marked by sophisticated patterns of asset concealment and cross-jurisdictional transfers, often weakens the effectiveness of conventional criminal justice mechanisms. This condition raises fundamental legal concerns regarding the adequacy of the current criminal justice regime in ensuring optimal asset recovery. Against this backdrop, the ratification of the Asset Forfeiture Bill (RUU Perampasan Aset) emerges as an urgent legal necessity, as it introduces a non-conviction-based asset forfeiture (NCB) mechanism grounded in the in rem principle, allowing asset confiscation without waiting for a final criminal conviction.This study focuses on examining the judicial reasoning (rasio decidendi) in Supreme Court Decision Number 1277 PK/Pid.Sus/2024, which highlights that conventional criminal procedures face prolonged timelines, multi-layered judicial processes, and difficulties in tracing and recovering criminal proceeds, creating substantial obstacles to effective state loss recovery. The Court emphasized that reliance solely on criminal conviction as a precondition for asset forfeiture may undermine both the effectiveness of state loss recovery and the broader public interest in combating economic crimes. This consideration forms the legal basis for recognizing the necessity of a non-conviction-based forfeiture mechanism.Using a normative juridical method with statutory and conceptual approaches, supported by primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, this study finds that the decision illustrates the limitations of conventional criminal justice procedures while underscoring the urgency for legislative reform through the ratification of the Asset Forfeiture Law. The law would ensure more effective recovery of state losses, enhance legal certainty, and maintain a proportional balance between law enforcement objectives and human rights protection.
Co-Authors Joko Widarto Muhamad Robby Dharmawan Ummu Faizah