Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
2.255
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Masalah-Masalah Hukum Arena Hukum Veritas et Justitia Jurnal Yudisial JURNAL PEMBANGUNAN HUKUM INDONESIA Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia
Efendi, A'an
Unknown Affiliation
Education Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 15 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 15 Documents
Search

 1   2 
KEKUASAAN MAJELIS PERMUSYAWARATAN RAKYAT: PROBLEMATIK DAN PENATAAN Efendi, A'an
Veritas et Justitia Vol. 9 No. 2 (2023): Veritas et Justitia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25123/vej.v9i2.6763

Abstract

People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) is an autonomous institution between the House of Representatives (DPR) and the Regional Representatives Council (DPD) but its powers are limited because it is periodic and incidental. Using doctrinal legal research with a statute and comparative approach, this research concludes, first, the problematic power of MPR from its position as an autonomous state institution that is attached to the state secretariat and budget but limited in authority because the exercise of its power is periodic and incidental, such as the power to change the Constitution or other powers which MPR may not implement within five, ten, or fifteen years and beyond during the term of office of MPR members, and secondly, how to restructure the powers of MPR by changing the position of MPR from an autonomous state institution to a joint session of the DPR and DPD by revising Article 2 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution which was originally "MPR consists of members of the DPR and members of DPD" to "MPR consists of the the DPR and DPD". It is found that the repositioning of MPR from an autonomous institution to a joint session may serve to balance its periodic and incidental powers.
Kerugian Bisnis Persero: Business Judgment Rule Versus Delik Korupsi Efendi, A'an; Susanti, Dyah Ochtorina; Suwardi, Suwardi
Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia Volume 6, Nomor 2, Tahun 2024
Publisher : PROGRAM STUDI MAGISTER HUKUM FAKULTAS HUKUM UNIVERSITAS DIPONEGORO

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14710/jphi.v6i2.193-209

Abstract

Persero yang beroperasi pada area hukum privat (hukum perseroan) dan hukum publik (hukum keuangan negara) menimbulkan problematik ketika bisnis Persero mengalami kerugian. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjawab permasalahan kerugian bisnis Persero apakah merupakan kerugian bisnis komersial atau kerugian keuangan negara. Penelitian menggunakan hukum doktrinal dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan kasus. Pasal 2 huruf g Undang-Undang Keuangan Negara yang dijustifikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 48/PUU-XI/2013 dan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 26/PUU-XIX/2021 yang menyatakan bahwa kekayaan negara yang telah dipisahkan ke dalam Persero tetap bagian dari kekayaan negara adalah tidak tepat. Kekayaan negara yang telah dipisahkan menjadi modal Persero secara hukum telah beralih menjadi kekayaan perseroan. Konsekuensi hukumnya kerugian Persero merupakan kerugian bisnis yang penyelesaiannya menggunakan prinsip-prinsip hukum perseroan. Direksi yang tanpa itikad buruk menyebabkan kerugian bagi Persero dilindungi prinsip business judgment rule dan tidak dapat didakwa perkara delik korupsi.
PROBLEMATIK PENATAAN JENIS DAN HIERARKI PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN Efendi, A'an
Veritas et Justitia Vol. 5 No. 1 (2019): Veritas et Justitia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25123/vej.v5i1.3172

Abstract

Indonesia over a period of numerous years has had four different regulations with the same intent, i.e. to reorder the hierarchy of the various forms and types of legislative products.  This effort apparently has not yet been a success. In this article, the author shall attempt to identify the core problem hindering the effort at re-ordering and discuss how other countries, notably, Germany, France, and the Netherland tackle the same comparable problem.  The approach used here is doctrinal or dogmatic, and in addition a comparative law method. One important recommendation resulting from this study is that it would be better if the Indonesian legislator re-order the hierarchy of the various forms and types of legislation on the basis of the hierarchal order of the organ issues the legislative product.
PROSPEK PERSEROAN PEMEGANG SAHAM TUNGGAL TANPA PERKECUALIAN UNTUK KEMUDAHAN BISNIS Efendi, A'an
Veritas et Justitia Vol. 6 No. 2 (2020): Veritas et Justitia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25123/vej.v6i2.3694

Abstract

As a general rule, economic enterprises or companies should be established based on the principle of capital association and agreement.  In contrast, Law No. 40 of 2007 re. Limited Liability Companies, provide exemptions to both principles. On the basis of this observation the issue discussed  in this articles are: (1) why is the exemption provided only for certain forms of economic enterprises or companies; (2) is this exemption to the rule justified, perceived from the principle of equality; and (3) what are the justification for allowing the establishment of a limited liability company with a single investor (sole ownership). Using a juridical doctrinal approach the answer to the above questions are: (1) exemption are granted for state owned companies, established and regulated under public law; (2)  the exemption is unjust as it discriminates and allowed for discriminative treatment; and (3) the practice of establishing a limited liability company by a single shareholder is a long standing practice.  
PERLINDUNGAN KONSUMEN PANGAN REKAYASA GENETIKA: RASIONALITAS DAN PROSPEK Efendi, A'an; Ochtorina Susanti, Dyah; Kumala Sari, Nuzulia
Veritas et Justitia Vol. 8 No. 2 (2022): Veritas et Justitia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25123/vej.v8i2.5401

Abstract

As a general observation we can say that there exists imbalance of power between producers and consumers of genetically engineered food. This paper, using a doctrinal legal approach, examines three issues: 1) the rationality of protecting consumers of genetically engineered food, 2) the rights of consumers of genetically engineered food, and 3) the effectiveness of consumer protection for genetically engineered food.  Arguably, the same situation exists between producers and consumers of genetically engineered food. Disparities and power imbalance relating to knowledge, capital – or simply power – determines the answer to those questions above.
Restructuring the Requirements for Establishing a Company in Adopting a One-Man Company Concept Without Limitation Susanti, Dyah Octorina; Efendi, A'an
Arena Hukum Vol. 17 No. 2 (2024)
Publisher : Universitas Brawijaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.arenahukum2024.01702.4

Abstract

The acceptance of one-man companies in Indonesian company law marks a step forward but falls short of aligning with the modern concept of such entities, as it contradicts the principle of justice. Unlike contemporary one-man companies, which serve as an alternative to multi-member companies and are not restricted to specific types of limited liability companies, the current Indonesian framework imposes limitations that result in unequal opportunities to establish one-man companies. This study addresses three key issues: the rationale behind adopting certain types of one-man companies, the relationship between these restrictions and the principle of justice and the potential for a more inclusive approach to one-man companies without such restrictions. Through doctrinal legal research and law reform-oriented research, this study reaches three conclusions: First, the acceptance of one-man companies is currently limited to Persero (limited liability company), regional-owned enterprises, village-owned enterprises, capital market companies and micro and small business companies. Each of these types differs from general companies in aspects such as establishment, function, organisational structure and dissolution. Second, limiting one-man companies to certain types of companies creates unequal opportunities for establishing such entities, which contradicts the principle of justice. Third, restructuring the requirements for company establishment should not eliminate the terms of agreement; rather, it should offer individuals the option to establish either a multi-shareholder company based on an agreement or a one-man company.
TINDAKAN ULTRA VIRES ORGAN PEMERINTAHAN DAN KONSEKUENSI HUKUMNYA Efendi, A'an; Sudarsono, Sudarsono
Masalah-Masalah Hukum Vol 53, No 2 (2024): MASALAH-MASALAH HUKUM
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14710/mmh.53.2.2024.145-154

Abstract

Article 17 paragraph (2) of the Government Administration Law which positions ultra vires as a species in the genus abuse of power is incorrect. Ultra vires is its own type of deviation from the use of power which is different from abuse of power. The legal consequences of ultra vires actions by government organs are null and void, which means that from the beginning the action and its legal consequences have no existence in law, and are not invalid as stipulated in Article 70 paragraph (1) of the Government Administration Law. Actions of government organs that are null and void must be declared in a state administrative court decision that the action is null and void and does not create or change any legal situation.
MAKNA DAN PROBLEMATIK PENGGUNAAN TERM “DAN”, “ATAU”, “DAN/ATAU”, “KECUALI”, DAN “SELAIN” DALAM UNDANG-UNDANG Efendi, A'an; Susanti, Dyah Ochtorina
Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia Vol 17, No 4 (2020): Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia - Desember 2020
Publisher : Direktorat Jenderal Peraturan Perundang-undang, Kementerian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54629/jli.v17i4.732

Abstract

Latar belakang penelitian ini adalah penggunaan term dan, atau, dan/atau, kecuali, dan selain dalam undang-undang secara tidak tepat yang kemudian menimbulkan problematik pemaknaan dan implementasi dalam praktik. Berdasarkan latar belakang tersebut dirumuskan isu hukum: Apa makna dan problematik penggunaan kata dan, atau, dan/atau, kecuali, dan selain dalam undang-undang? Menggunakan tipe penelitian hukum doktrinal, hasil penelitian ini: (1) term dan memiliki empat makna: (a) dan sebagai konjungsi, (b) dan berarti inklusif, (c) dan berarti atau, atau (d) dan berarti gabungan atau beberapa; (2) term atau adalah konjungsi yang memiliki dua makna: (a) atau berarti ekslusif dan inklusif dengan penggunaan secara umum adalah inkulisif kecuali konsep yang dihubungkan saling eksklusif, atau (b) atau berarti dan; (3) term dan/atau berarti konjungtif untuk menggabungkan sekaligus disjungtif untuk memisahkan; dan (4) term kecuali berarti ekslusif dan disintegratif sedangkan term selain sifatnya inklusif dan komplementer. Penggunaan term dan, atau, dan/atau, kecuali, dan selain secara tidak tepat tidak hanya berakibat pada perubahan makna dari makna yang sebenarnya dikehendaki undang-undang tetapi kesulitan penerapannya dalam praktik.
Reformulasi Teoretis Konsep Kebatalan Keputusan Administrasi Pemerintahan dalam Undang-Undang Administrasi Pemerintahan Efendi, A'an; Sudarsono, Sudarsono; Edwinarta, Caesar Dimas; Musthafa, Annas Rasid
Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia Vol 21, No 4 (2024): Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia - Desember 2024
Publisher : Direktorat Jenderal Peraturan Perundang-undang, Kementerian Hukum

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54629/jli.v21i4.1266

Abstract

The two types of invalidity of administrative acts in the Government Administration Law, which include invalid and voidable, are not in accordance with the concept of invalidity in administrative law. The aim of this research is to find answers to two problems, first, the concept of administrative acts in the Government Administration Law, and second, the correct meaning regarding the invalidity of decisions based on the concepts and principles of administrative law. Using a doctrinal type of legal research with a legislation approach and a conceptual approach, this research produces two conclusions. First, the concept of decision in the Government Administration Law is a decision in a broad sense including general case decisions (besluit) and individual case decisions (beschikking) including factual actions, and the latter is not appropriate. Second, the nullity of administrative acts in administrative law includes being null and void and voidable, firstly the decision and its legal consequences are deemed to have never existed, secondly the decision and its legal consequences are valid until they are annulled by a later decision or administrative court.
MENGEKSPLORASI DOKTRIN STANDING DI PERADILAN ADMINISTRASI INDONESIA: TAFSIR DAN HASIL Efendi, A'an; Suwardi
Veritas et Justitia Vol. 11 No. 1 (2025): Veritas et Justitia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25123/hp6dqa52

Abstract

The authority to bring a claim before Indonesia’s administrative courts originates from the phrase “feeling that his interests have been harmed” in Article 53(1) of the State Administrative Court Act. Because this clause is open‑textured, it must be interpreted to define its exact reach. Using doctrinal legal analysis of court rulings and scholarly commentary on standing, this study concludes that two categories of plaintiffs can sue: (1) individuals or private legal entities that suffer direct losses from government acts or decisions, and (2) qualifying organizations. For an individual or private entity to obtain standing, it must demonstrate (i) a recognizable interest, (ii) a legal connection to the disputed act or decision, and (iii) harm to that interest caused by the government’s unlawful conduct. Organizational standing is available to bodies that satisfy statutory requirements to appear in court and that litigate not for their own interests but for the public purpose they were created to serve. Standing may also be granted when the harm is merely potential, allowing the administrative court to act preventively before actual damage occurs.
Co-Authors Dyah Ochtorina Susanti Edwinarta, Caesar Dimas Kumala Sari, Nuzulia Musthafa, Annas Rasid Sudarsono Susanti, Dyah Octorina Suwardi Suwardi Suwardi