Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
2.551
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Jurnal Literasiologi YURISDIKSI : Jurnal Wacana Hukum dan Sains PROFICIO: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS) Yuridika Mudabbir: Journal Research and Education Studies Indonesia Law Reform Journal (ILREJ) Jurnal Pengabdian Bersama Masyarakat Indonesia Mahadi : Indonesia Journal of Law Warkat
Sukarmi
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Humanities Computer Science & IT Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 16 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search
Journal : Yuridika

 1 
Criminalizing Civil Law Actions of Default into Criminal Acts of Fraud: A Human Rights Perspective Yonatan; Wijayanta, Tata; Sugiri, Bambang; Sukarmi; Sulistio, Faizin
Yuridika Vol. 39 No. 3 (2024): Volume 39 No 3 September 2024
Publisher : Universitas Airlangga

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20473/ydk.v39i3.51329

Abstract

The terms "Default" and "Fraud" and/or “Embezzlement” are often interchanged without clarity of meaning in many discussion forums, both oral and written. This confusion can be seen from the many court decisions that acquit defendants from prosecution which have permanent legal force. The public often hears that law enforcers carry out criminalization, such as witnesses becoming suspects, suspects becoming defendants and so on by shifting the civil legal action of Default to criminal act of Fraud and/or Embezzlement. Using 'criminalization' and 'criminalized' in this article is considered inappropriate, so it has been replaced by 'criminalizing' and 'criminalized'. If there is an action to shift the civil legal act of Default into a criminal act of Fraud and/ or Embezzlement, so from a human rights perspective, it is against the law. By using normative legal research methods, this paper examines how to differentiate civil legal acts of Default from criminal acts of Fraud and/or Embezzlement, how to apply civil compensation in cases where there are already criminal legal remedies, and what is the legal and human rights perspective when criminalization occurs. This paper uses a statutory approach and a case approach. The results show: First, there is a real difference between civil legal acts of Default and criminal acts of Fraud and/ or Embezzlement; Second, the application of compensation can be carried out through criminal and civil procedural law mechanisms; Finally, criminalizing civil legal acts into criminal acts is a form of violation of human rights.
Harmonization of Personal Data Protection Principles With Electronic Justice Systems In Indonesia Mardyansyah, Dody Novizar; Sukarmi; Adi Kusumaningrum; Yenny Eta Widyanti
Yuridika Vol. 40 No. 3 (2025): Volume 40 No 3 September 2025
Publisher : Universitas Airlangga

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20473/ydk.v40i3.74179

Abstract

Modern digital-based justice is the answer to the challenges of the development of the times. Although modern justice reflects an adaptive judicial body, it must still be equipped with established regulations. This study aims to examine the harmonization of personal data protection principles between the Supreme Court Regulation No. 7/2022 concerning electronic case administration and trials and Law No. 27/2022 concerning Personal Data Protection (PDP Law). In this case, the researcher uses a normative juridical method, with a statutory regulatory and comparative combined approach. This study highlights the norms gap in the Supreme Court Regulation No. 7/2022, particularly in the aspect of protecting the personal data of the parties input into the electronic justice administration system. The main findings exhibited are that the Supreme Court Regulation No. 7/2022 does not regulate the basic principles of data protection as mandated by the PDP Law, which has the potential to cause legal uncertainty and privacy right violations. The fact that the principle of personal data protection in the Supreme Court regulation has not been absorbed is due to the PDP Law, which only came into effect in 2024, even though both were enacted in the same year in 2022. This is seen as weakening the legitimacy of electronic justice in Indonesia. This study is expected to provide a positive contribution in the form of regulatory reform through the revision of the Supreme Court regulations, the establishment of data protection units in the judicial environment, and strengthening institutional coordination. The results of the comparative analysis of common law systems such as England show the importance of integrating data protection principles into the legal infrastructure and institutions of electronic justice to be aware of the protection of privacy rights that intersect with the guarantee of the human rights of justice seekers.
Co-Authors Achadiah Rachmawati Adi Kusumaningrum Alam, Moch. Zairul Amelia Sri Kusuma Dewi, Amelia Sri Kusuma Aristy, Tiara Putri Dewantari Nasution, Nurul Annisa Faizin Sulistio Frelyta Ainuz Zahro Ganindha, Ranitya Hanif Nur Widhiyanti Ibadi, Mohamad Indah Dwi Qurbani Irfan H. Djunaidi Maharani, Dhaniswara Maharani, Ria Mardyansyah, Dody Novizar Muhammad Arifin Muhammad Arifin Muhammad Luthfi Murty, Theta Patricia Audrey Ruslijanto Rachmawati, Yasniar Rumi Suwardiyati Safaruddin Siregar, Amselnius Siti Azizah Siti Hamidah Siti Hamidah Situmorang, Boy Kresendo Sugiri, Bambang Tata Wijayanta Umar, Azahlia Wati, Anif Mukaromah Yenny Eta Widyanti Yonatan Zulaika Zunov, Farahannesa