Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.817
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Akta Jurnal Pro Hukum : Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS)
Yanto Irianto
Unknown Affiliation
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences

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

Found 5 Documents
Search

 1 
Implications Juridical Council Regulation Honorary Center Notary Association of Indonesia Number 1 of 2017 About The Limits of Fairness Total Creation Agreement in Semarang Adwin Adwin; Yanto Irianto; Munsharif Abdul Chalim
Jurnal Akta Vol 5, No 3 (2018): September 2018
Publisher : Program Magister (S2) Kenotariatan, Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30659/akta.v5i3.3261

Abstract

The purpose of writing  article is to know and the Honorary Board of Indonesian Notary Association Center for the Determination of Regulation No. 1 of 2017 on the Fairness Limit Per day Total Creation Agreement. This research methods to achieve the objectives of  law is the law of sociological or empirical research. Results of the research which set the contents of  regulation on the restriction of the notary in the agreement a day in which a number of 20 (twenty) in a day. Destinations create those rules for protecting Notary and society who use the services of a Notary, in  case the Honorary Board of Indonesian Notary Association has authority in making these regulations mandate based on the Notary Act. Sanctions For notaries who violate these rules can be wearing the Internal sanctions in question is the organizational and External sanctions.Keywords: Honorary Council Regulation, The Authority, Sanctions.
Juridical Analysis of the Role of the Prosecutor’s Office in Criminal Law Yohanes Pande; Riadi Asra Rahmad; Yanto Irianto; Rio Akmal Syahban; Sy Muhammad Ridho Rizki Maulufi Alkadrie
International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) Vol. 6 No. 3: July 2024
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56338/ijhess.v6i3.5827

Abstract

Basically, the Prosecutor's Office is a state law enforcement tool, protector and protector of society, obliged to maintain the rule of law. The Prosecutor's Office thus acts as a law enforcer. The prosecutor's office is the only state institution which is a government apparatus that has the authority to delegate criminal cases, prosecute perpetrators of criminal acts in court and carry out decisions and decisions of criminal judges. This power is a characteristic of the prosecutor's office that differentiates other law enforcement institutions or bodies. In the criminal justice system, there is a prosecution sub-system carried out by the Prosecutor's Office of the Republic of Indonesia. The prosecutor has an important role in the trial and it is the prosecutor who is authorized by law to carry out prosecutions as a public prosecutor who acts on behalf of the State in carrying out his duties and authority. In the realm of criminal law, the prosecutor's office has a very urgent role and also has a role and authority which is confirmed in Article 30C of Law Number 11 of 2021 concerning Amendments to Law Number 16 of 2004 concerning the Prosecutor's Office of the Republic of Indonesia.
The Role of Evidence in Proving the Element of Intent in Murder Cases Bambang Sasmita Adi Putra; Tumian Lian Daya Purba; Hamzah Mardiansyah; Nining Suningrat; Yanto Irianto
International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) Vol. 7 No. 2: April 2025
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56338/ijhess.v7i2.7320

Abstract

This study examines the role of evidence in proving intent in murder cases within the criminal justice system. Intent is an element in distinguishing between different types of homicide, such as premeditated murder and manslaughter. The complexity of proving intent is influenced by the types of evidence available, including direct, circumstantial, forensic, and testimonial evidence. Direct evidence, such as confessions or eyewitness testimony, is the most definitive but is often unavailable, making circumstantial evidence essential in many cases. Forensic evidence, particularly autopsy results, provides significant insights into whether the actions were deliberate or accidental. Motive also plays an important role in strengthening the case for intent, offering contextual understanding of the perpetrator's reasons for committing the crime. Witness testimony, although important, requires careful evaluation to ensure its reliability. Psychological factors, such as emotional distress or provocation, can further complicate proving intent, as they may reduce the level of premeditation and influence the legal classification of the crime. This paper argues that proving intent in murder cases requires a comprehensive approach that integrates multiple forms of evidence to ensure accurate legal outcomes and fair justice.
Penawaran Jasa Notaris Melalui Website Agustiana; Yanto Irianto
Jurnal Pro Hukum : Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik Vol 12 No 1 (2023)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gresik

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55129/.v12i1.2437

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk ; 1) penggunaan website oleh notaris ditinjau dari Pasal 4 angka 3 Kode Etik Notaris; 2) pengawasan terhadap penggunaan website dalam profesi jabatan notaris. Tipe penelitian ini adalah penelitian Normatif- Empiris. Data dikualifikasi sebagai data primer dan sekunder. Data primer diperoleh melalui wawancara, dan data sekunder diperoleh melalui studi literatur. Data yang dikumpulkan kemudian diolah dengan menggunakan pendekatan analisis kualitatif. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa: 1) Penggunaan Website oleh Notaris ditinjau dari Pasal 4 angka 3 Kode Etik Notaris adalah bentuk pelanggaran kode etik jika dalam website tersebut mempromosikan diri, yang dapat diartikan bahwa mengiklankan diri sebagaimana yang dimaksud dalam Pasal 4 kode etik notaris. Dalam iklan tersebut ada kata/kalimat atau niat dari Notaris yang bersangkutan untuk memancing masyarakat agar menggunakan jasanya. 2) Pengawasan terhadap penggunaan website dalam profesi jabatan Notaris merupakan wilayah dari dewan kehormatan yang harus mencari bukti terlebih dahulu apakah seorang notaris dalam menggunakan website benar-benar telah melakukan pelanggaran terhadap aturan Kode Etik. Hal ini tentu saja penting karena penggunaan website sangat rentan dengan perspektif apakah benar-benar telah terjadi promosi dalam penggunaan website oleh notaris.
Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Notaris Pengganti Dalam Pemanggilan Berkaitan Dengan Kepentingan Peradilan Yanto Irianto; Agustiana
Jurnal Pro Hukum : Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik Vol 12 No 2 (2023)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gresik

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55129/.v12i2.2642

Abstract

Notaris pengganti memegang tanggung jawab penting yang sama dengan notaris. Tanggung jawab notaris pengganti dalam menjalankan tugasnya memerlukan perlindungan hukum sebagaimana disebutkan dalam Undang-undang Dasar Hukum Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) pasal 66. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji dan mengelaborasi lebih jauh tentang apakah ketentuan Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) pasal 66 berlaku bagi Notaris Pengganti dan bentuk perlindungan hukum terhadap Notaris Pengganti. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan menelaah bahan kepustakaan atau hukum sekunder sedangkan dalam mencari dan mengumpulkan data dilakukan dengan dua pendekatan, yaitu pendekatan hukum dan pendekatan konseptual. Kajian ini menyimpulkan bahwa pasal 66 UUJN mengatur perlindungan hukum bagi notaris bukan notaris pengganti. Perlindungan hukum bagi notaris pengganti mengenai pemberitahuan kepentingan yudisial bersifat umum yang didasarkan pada peniadaan pengingkaran dan kewajiban.
Co-Authors Adwin Adwin Agustiana Bambang Sasmita Adi Putra Hamzah Mardiansyah Munsharif Abdul Chalim Nining Suningrat Riadi Asra Rahmad Rio Akmal Syahban Sy Muhammad Ridho Rizki Maulufi Alkadrie Tumian Lian Daya Purba Yohanes Pande