Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Sophist Jurnal Sosial Politik Kajian Islam dan Tafsir Unizar Recht Journal
Abdul Gani Makhrup
Universitas Islam Al-Azhar
Religion Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA PENYALAHGUNAAN NARKOTIKA DALAM PUTUSAN PN MATARAM No 1995 K/Pid.Sus/2019 Iqlima Putri; Ruslan Haerani; Abdul Gani Makhrup
Unizar Recht Journal (URJ) Vol. 4 No. 3 (2025): Unizar Recht Journal (URJ)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Al-Azhar Mataram

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36679/urj.v4i3.286

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui bagaimanakah pertanggungjawaban pidana terhadap tindak pidana narkotika yang dilakukan dengan permufakatan jahat dan untuk mengetahui pertimbangan Hukum Hakim dalam menjatuhkan putusan pada perkara Nomor 1995 K/Pid.Sus/2019/PN.Mtr. Jenis Penelitian yang digunakan penulis adalah penelitian yuridis normatif, dengan melakukan penelitian terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan dan berbagai literatur yang berkaitan dengan permasalahan. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan di Pengadilan Negeri Kelas 1A Mataram. Hasil penelitian ini yakni, pelaku tindak pidana narkotika harus mempertanggungjawabkan perbuatannya sesuai ketentuan Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No. 35 Tahun 2009. Pertanggungjawaban pelaku tindak pidana narkotika berbeda-beda sesuai dengan perbuatan yang telah dilakukannya maupun jenis narkotika yang disalahgunakan sesuai dengan ketentuan pidana yang telah tercantum dalam UU No. 35 Tahun 2009. Dalam putusan Nomor 1995 K/Pid.Sus/2019 terdakwa dinyatakan terbukti bersalah melakukan tindak pidana karena melanggar Pasal 114 Ayat (2) juncto Pasal 132 Ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika dan dijatuhi pidana penjara 10 tahun.
BETWEEN CUSTOMARY LEGITIMACY AND STATE RECOGNITION: LEGAL PLURALISM IN THE SETTLEMENT OF INHERITANCE DISPUTES ARISING FROM UNREGISTERED CUSTOMARY MARRIAGE IN THE SASAK COMMUNITY OF LOMBOK INDONESIA Abdul Gani Makhrup
Sophist: Jurnal Sosial Politik Kajian Islam dan Tafsir Vol. 8 No. 2 (2026): Islamic Thought, Social Transformation, and the Future of Muslim Society
Publisher : Journal Sophist

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20414/js.v8i2.136

Abstract

Customary marriage remains a living institution among the Sasak community of Gadung Mas Village, West Sakra Subdistrict, East Lombok Regency, West Nusa Tenggara, even where such marriages are never registered with the state. This study examines how customary legitimacy and state legal recognition interact when an unregistered customary marriage later generates an inheritance dispute. Using empirical legal research with a socio-legal approach, data were collected through in-depth interviews with a customary leader, a religious leader, and the village head of Gadung Mas, supplemented by a systematic review of national legislation and Scopus-indexed comparative literature on legal pluralism and Indonesian inheritance law. The findings show that marital legitimacy in Gadung Mas rests on three interlocking pillars: adat procession as social legitimacy, religious solemnization (akad nikah) as normative validity, and state registration as administrative certainty; the third pillar is frequently deferred or omitted without the marriage being regarded, locally, as defective. Inheritance disputes are resolved through a multi-tier mechanism that begins with family deliberation (musyawarah keluarga), proceeds to mediation by a customary leader (tokoh adat) working alongside a religious figure, and escalates to the Religious Court only when consensus fails. Read through Griffiths' theory of legal pluralism, Ehrlich's (1936) and Soekanto's (1981) concept of living law, and Radbruch's triad of legal purposes, this pattern is best understood not as a competition between adat and state law but as a functional division of labor: adat law supplies social legitimacy and restorative resolution, while state law supplies evidentiary certainty when adat consensus is unattainable. The study's original contribution is a Social–Juridical Legitimacy Harmonization (SJLH) model that maps how these two forms of legitimacy combine across the marriage cycle and the stages of dispute resolution.
Co-Authors Iqlima Putri Ruslan Haerani