Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Community Development Journal: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Journal Justiciabelen (JJ) Sinergi International Journal of Law
Hasbi, Fariz Rifqi
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Health Professions Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Criminal Liability For Perpetrators of Negligent Crimes Resulting in the Death of Others in Traffic Accidents Hasbi, Fariz Rifqi; Utari, Anak Agung Dewi; Aringga, Rino Dedi
Sinergi International Journal of Law Vol. 1 No. 3 (2023): November 2023
Publisher : Yayasan Sinergi Kawula Muda

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61194/law.v1i3.96

Abstract

Criminal responsibility leads to the prosecution of the perpetrator who has committed a criminal act and fulfills its elements as stipulated in the law. Viewed from the perspective of the occurrence of a prohibited act (obligation), an individual will be criminally accountable for such actions if they are against the law. To hold someone criminally accountable, one must consider the culpability of the perpetrator. However, it is not sufficient to consider only the culpability; one must also consider the reasons and circumstances that eliminate the penalty as outlined in Articles 44, 48, 49, 50, and 51 of the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP). In cases where the perpetrator has met the provisions of those articles, they are exempted from the threat of criminal charges. The research method used is normative juridical, which involves legal research on primary and secondary legal materials, especially those related to the discussed subject matter. This study aims to determine how criminal responsibility is imposed on perpetrators of negligent crimes resulting in the death of others in traffic accidents. From the research findings, it is concluded that the defendant Mariyanto, based on the trial facts, did not meet the criteria set forth in Articles 44, 48, 49, 50, and 51 of the KUHP that would eliminate the penalty. Therefore, Mariyanto can be held responsible and subject to criminal accountability. Considering that the victim also bears some responsibility contributing to the commission of the offense and that the defendant had no malicious intent, posing no danger, the writer suggests that the defendant should be appropriately sentenced to probation, as proposed by Mariyanto's Legal Counsel in their plea, taking into account humanitarian and justice considerations.
PENEGAKAN HUKUM TERHADAP PENAGIH HUTANG YANG MEMAKSA MASUK RUMAH DAN BERBUAT KEKERASAN Hasbi, Fariz Rifqi
Journal Justiciabelen (JJ) Vol 4, No 01 (2024): January
Publisher : Univeristas Suryakancana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35194/jj.v4i01.3945

Abstract

ABSTRAK Utang-piutang merupakan perbuatan hukum perdata, namun penagihan utang oleh kreditur dapat mengandung unsur pidana jika dilakukan secara melawan hukum. Contohnya, penagihan dengan memasuki rumah debitur tanpa izin dan melakukan pemaksaan. Tindakan ini melanggar Pasal 167 ayat (1) dan Pasal 355 ayat (1) KUHP. Penerapan pasal-pasal tersebut membutuhkan batasan dan indikator agar dapat diterapkan secara tepat. Oleh karena itu, perlu dilakukan penelitian lebih lanjut mengenai masalah ini. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif atau penelitian doktrinal, yang menganalisis hukum baik sebagaimana tertulis dalam undang-undang maupun sebagaimana diputuskan oleh hakim melalui proses yudisial. Tindakan kreditur yang memaksa masuk ke rumah debitur melanggar Pasal 167 ayat (1) KUHP. Selain itu, tindakan kreditur yang memaksa debitur untuk membayar utang dengan ancaman kekerasan melanggar Pasal 355 ayat (1) KUHP. Oleh karena itu, kreditur yang melakukan kedua perbuatan tersebut dapat dikenakan kedua pasal tersebut secara komulatif karena terindikasi melakukan perbarengan tindak pidana atau concursus. ABSTRACT Debts are an act of civil law, but debt charging by creditors may be criminal if done against the law. For example, billing by entering the debtor's house without permission and performing forced enforcement. This act violates Article 167 (1) and Article 355 (1) of the Covenant. The application of these articles requires limitations and indicators in order to be properly applied. Therefore, further research needs to be done on this issue. This study uses normative jurisprudential methods or doctrinal research, which analyzes the law both as written in the law and as decided by the judge through the judicial process. The act of a creditor forcing a debtor to enter the debtor's house is a violation of Article 167 (1) of the Covenant. Furthermore, the act of the creditor to force a debitor to pay the debt with the threat of violence is in breach of Article 355 (1) of this Code. Therefore, a crediteur who commits both such acts may be charged with both of these articles in conjunction because it is indicated to have committed a criminal offence or a concorsius.
ANALISIS PERBEDAAN SANKSI TERHADAP PEMBUNUHAN MENURUT KITAB UNDANG-UNDANG HUKUM PIDANA (KUHP) DAN PEMBUNUHAN MENURUT HUKUM ISLAM Sutoyo, Yesi Lestarina; Hasbi, Fariz Rifqi
Community Development Journal : Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): Volume 5 No. 3 Tahun 2024
Publisher : Universitas Pahlawan Tuanku Tambusai

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31004/cdj.v5i3.29558

Abstract

Perbedaan dalam sanksi terhadap pembunuhan antara Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum. Pidana (KUHP) dan hukum Islam menjadi subjek perhatian yang penting dalam diskusi mengenai sistem hukum dan keadilan. Dari segi sumber hukum, sanksi terhadap pembunuhan dalam KUHP didasarkan pada hukum positif yang berlaku di suatu negara, sedangkan dalam hukum Islam, sanksi didasarkan pada prinsip-prinsip hukum syariah yang terdapat dalam Al-Quran, Hadis. Proses hukum yang digunakan juga berbeda, dengan KUHP mengandalkan sistem peradilan pidana negara sementara hukum Islam bisa melibatkan pengadilan berdasarkan prinsip-prinsip syariah atau proses mediasi. Selain itu, sanksi yang diterapkan juga berbeda antara kedua sistem hukum ini, dengan KUHP cenderung menggunakan hukuman pidana seperti penjara atau denda, sedangkan hukum Islam mungkin menerapkan konsep seperti diyat (denda darah) atau hukuman qishash (balasan seimbang).
Co-Authors aringga, Rino dedi Dewi Utari, Anak Agung Sutoyo, Yesi Lestarina