Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JHSS (Journal of Humanities and Social Studies)
Rachmad Abduh
Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia
Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Legal Protection For Children In Conflict With The Law: A Comparative Study Of Law Number 11 Of 2012 And The Juvenile And Family Court ACT B.E. 2553 Cindy Atika; Rachmad Abduh
JHSS (JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL STUDIES) Vol. 10 No. 01 (2026): JHSS (Journal of Humanities and Social Studies) (SI)
Publisher : UNIVERSITAS PAKUAN

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Legal protection for children in conflict with the law constitutes an integral part of criminal procedural law, placing the principle of the best interests of the child as the foundation of every law enforcement action. This study comparatively analyzes the regulation of child legal protection under Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, in conjunction with the Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code, and the Juvenile and Family Court Act B.E. 2553 in Thailand. The findings indicate that, normatively, both countries have adopted restorative justice principles through diversion mechanisms, the limitation of detention as an ultimum remedium, and guarantees of the right to legal assistance. However, at the level of implementation, challenges remain, including inconsistencies in the application of diversion and the suboptimal fulfillment of children’s rights. Therefore, strengthening procedural aspects is necessary to realize a more responsive and humane juvenile justice system.
A Legal Analysis of the Evidence System in Criminal Procedure: A Study of Evidence in Indonesia and Thailand Fahrezi Arfa Akbar Harahap; Rachmad Abduh
JHSS (JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL STUDIES) Vol. 10 No. 01 (2026): JHSS (Journal of Humanities and Social Studies) (SI)
Publisher : UNIVERSITAS PAKUAN

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study juridically analyzes the system of evidence in Indonesian and Thai criminal procedure law, focusing on the regulation and application of evidentiary instruments. It compares the formalistic and enumerative approach of Indonesia’s Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), particularly Articles 183–184, which require a minimum of two lawful pieces of evidence—namely witness testimony, expert testimony, documents, indications, and defendant statements—against Thailand’s more inclusive model under Sections 226–231 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), which classifies evidence into material, documentary, and personal evidence and grants broader judicial discretion. Both systems share similarities, including the exclusionary rule against illegally obtained evidence and the recognition of digital evidence in response to contemporary legal developments, particularly after Indonesia’s reform through Law No. 20 of 2025. However, structural differences significantly affect the effectiveness of justice: Indonesia emphasizes legal certainty to prevent judicial subjectivity, while Thailand promotes procedural flexibility and allows private prosecution to enhance efficiency and victim participation. Employing a normative-comparative method, this study concludes that ASEAN legal harmonization is necessary to develop a balanced hybrid evidentiary model capable of ensuring substantive truth while safeguarding the human rights of suspects and defendants in the era of transnational crime.
Comparative Analysis Of Prosecutorial Powers In The Criminal Justice Systems Of Indonesia And Thailand Yudi Anseria Siregar; Rachmad Abduh
JHSS (JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL STUDIES) Vol. 10 No. 01 (2026): JHSS (Journal of Humanities and Social Studies) (SI)
Publisher : UNIVERSITAS PAKUAN

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study examines the comparative regulation, authority, and procedural framework of prosecution within the criminal justice systems of Indonesia and Thailand. The research focuses on the normative arrangements governing prosecution, the scope of authority exercised by public prosecutors, and the procedural differences in criminal proceedings that influence prosecutorial practices in both countries. The method employed is normative juridical research using a comparative law approach, based on the analysis of statutory regulations, legal doctrines, and relevant scholarly literature. The findings indicate that Indonesia adopts the dominus litis principle, which places the public prosecutor as the sole authority controlling prosecution, as regulated under the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) and the Law on the Public Prosecution Service. This system reflects a centralized and formalistic prosecutorial structure. In contrast, Thailand implements a prosecution system that grants broader discretionary powers to prosecutors during the pre-prosecution stage and allows greater victim participation within criminal proceedings. These differences demonstrate Indonesia’s emphasis on legal certainty and institutional hierarchy, while Thailand prioritizes procedural flexibility and victim protection. This comparative analysis highlights the strengths and limitations of each system and provides valuable insights for the development and reform of prosecutorial authority within Indonesia’s criminal justice system through comparative legal perspectives.
Co-Authors Cindy Atika Fahrezi Arfa Akbar Harahap Yudi Anseria Siregar