Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
1.633
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Journal Equity of Law and Governance
Indrasari Kresnadjaja
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 5 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 5 Documents
Search

 1 
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ON IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPANY WHEN CONFLICT WITH COMMISSIONERS Dharsana, I Made Pria; Indrasari Kresnadjaja; I Gusti Agung Jordi; I Putu Lingga Dhananjaya
Journal Equity of Law and Governance Vol. 1 No. 2
Publisher : Warmadewa Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (301.193 KB) | DOI: 10.55637/elg.1.2.3852.89-94

Abstract

Limited Liability Company hereinafter referred to as Company is a legal entity which is a capital partnership. It is established based on an agreement to conduct a business activities with authorized capital. This is entirely divided into shares or individual legal entities which all meet the criteria for Micro and meet the requirements set out in The Law on Limited Liability Companies and its implementing regulations (Law Number 11 of 2020 regarding Job Creation) which changes several definitions of Limited Liability Companies as regulated in Law Number 40 of 2007 (hereinafter referred to as UUPT). The research method used in this writing is a normative legal research method which analyzes the problem through an approach to legislation, theory and applicable principles. Talking about the applicable provisions in the important organs of the Limited Liability Company. The Limited Liability Company Organ itself is a Group of Organs consisting of the General Meeting of Shareholders (hereinafter referred to as GMS), the Board of Directors, and the Board of Commissioners. Among the three organs of a limited liability company, the directors have full authority over the company. Based on the provisions of Article 1 paragraph (5) of the Company Law, “The Board of Directors is an organ of the Company which is authorized and fully responsible for the management of the Company for the benefit of the Company in accordance with the aims and objectives of the Company and represents the Company both inside and outside the court in accordance with the provisions of the articles of association”. Besides that, in a company, the board of directors is the party who has the most important role, both in managing the company, managing it, and advancing it. The Board of Directors is appointed by the GMS, as referred to in Article 94 paragraph (1) of the Company Law, that; “Members of the Board of Directors are appointed by the GMS.” And further paragraph (3) members of the Board of Directors are appointed for a certain period of time and may be reappointed.
Agrarian Reform Responding to the Challenges of the Times Dharsana, I Made Pria; I Dewa Gede Palguna; Indrasari Kresnadjaja
Journal Equity of Law and Governance Vol. 2 No. 2
Publisher : Warmadewa Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55637/elg.2.2.5879.86-93

Abstract

Indonesia has entered the age of 77 years. In a long period of time, it seems we should be concerned that the implementation of Agrarian Reform as an effort to reorganize the ownership, control, use, and utilization of land for justice, prosperity, and people's welfare which is a national priority has not been fully successful. The Agrarian Reform Movement must be admitted that it is not a solution to the existing conflict. However, the aim of the agrarian reform is expected to be a systematic effort that is more preventive in nature to avoid the occurrence of agrarian inequality and conflict in the country in the future. So the author concludes that the main goal of “Agrarian Reform Responding to the Challenges of the Times is the creation of social justice which is marked by the existence of agrarian justice, increased productivity, and increased people's welfare.
The Role Of A Notary In Preventing Money Laundering I Made Pria Dharsana; Indrasari Kresnadjaja; I Putu Lingga Dhananjaya; Rizky Mustika Rini
Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Vol. 22 No. 001 (2023): Pena Justisia (Special Issue)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pekalongan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31941/pj.v22i3.3089

Abstract

The Notary's participation in preventing money laundering is to report to PPATK when they know of suspicious financial transactions related to the deed they made. The Notary's position as a whistleblower in the event of suspected suspicious financial transactions as an effort to prevent money laundering has not violated the principle of confidentiality of position. Instead, the Notary must apply the precautionary principle. Notary as the reporting party is an implementation of its obligations stipulated in Article 16 paragraph (1) point an of UUJN, namely acting trustfully and honestly. The State appoints notaries to serve the public in civil Law. Therefore Notaries must also take care not to let the State be harmed by attempts to disguise money from criminal acts. Notaries with this submit to higher interests. This is so that Notaries do not get involved in money laundering cases because they are considered to help carry out a criminal act
Implementation of the Principle of Business Judgement Rule Doctrine to State-Owned Companies as an Effort to Protect Directors in Good Faith I Made Pria Dharsana; Indrasari Kresnadjaja; I Putu Lingga Dhananjaya
Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Vol. 22 No. 2 (2023): Pena Justisia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pekalongan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31941/pj.v22i2.3090

Abstract

The Business Judgement Rule is a doctrine that protects Directors in good faith for the Company's losses. The point is that as long as the Board of Directors acts in good faith and solely for the Company's benefit. However, it turns out that the Company still suffers losses. It does not necessarily become the burden of the Board of Directors personal responsibility. Therefore, the Board of Directors cannot be held responsible for the Company's losses if the Board of Directors, in carrying out actions, has fulfilled all its obligations with the principles of good corporate Governance (GCG). If all GCG obligations and principles have been fulfilled, the Board of Directors is categorized as having good faith and cannot be declared wrong. The results of the author's study, in the context of the Business Judgment Rule Doctrine, the losses incurred are normal or reasonable business losses, and therefore the Company is responsible. And no one can be punished if there is no mistake. With the background of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 01/PHPUPres/XVII/2019 (Constitutional Court Decision 01) and two Supreme Court Decisions, the author tries to examine in more detail related to Decision No. 3849/K/Pid.Sus/2019 dated December 2, 2019, on behalf of Defendant Frederick ST Siahaan (former Finance Director of Pertamina) / (Supreme Court Decision 3849) and Decision No. 121K/Pid.Sus/2020 dated March 9, 2020, on behalf of Defendant Karen Agustiawan (former President Director of Pertamina).
Settlement of land disputes over ownership in Indonesia land Registration System I Made Pria Dharsana; Desak Rai Kutha Asriwijaya; Indrasari Kresnadjaja
Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Vol. 23 No. 2 (2024): Pena Justisia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pekalongan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31941/pj.v23i2.4134

Abstract

The Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA) is Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Regulations aimed at resolving the dualism conflict of agrarian law in Indonesia at that time, where previously most of the Indonesian people still applied agrarian law based on Western law colonial and a small part based on customary law. The purpose of writing this journal is to analyze and understand the occurrence of legal disputes against dual certificate holders and to analyze and understand the obstacles and solutions to the resolution of dual certificate legal disputes. The research method used in this paper is a qualitative research method with a normative juridical approach. Based on the results of the study, show that the occurrence of multiple certificates is caused by several factors, namely the existence of bad faith from the certificate applicant, an error on the part of the Land Office, namely in terms of collecting and processing physical data and land juridical data, the unavailability of a comprehensive land registration map, and because the domicile of the interested party is outside the city. Settlement of land disputes can be resolved by way of deliberation by the parties and through the judiciary. On the other hand, there is a need for special procedural law provisions either through deliberation or mediation at the BPN and the courts in the event of a dispute resolution through litigation
Co-Authors Desak Rai Kutha Asriwijaya I Dewa Gede Palguna I Gusti Agung Jordi I Made Pria Dharsana, I Made Pria I Putu Lingga Dhananjaya Rizky Mustika Rini