Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
6.112
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL MAGISTER HUKUM UDAYANA LAW REFORM JURNAL LITIGASI (e-Journal) SALAM: Jurnal Sosial dan Budaya Syar-i Sriwijaya Law Review Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies Hasanuddin Law Review Syntax Literate: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia Jurnal Ius Constituendum Undang: Jurnal Hukum Nagari Law Review JISIP: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Pendidikan PALAR (Pakuan Law review) Jurnal Simbur Cahaya Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Media Iuris Al-Manhaj: Jurnal Hukum dan Pranata Sosial Islam LEGAL BRIEF Jurnal Rechts Vinding : Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional Multidiciplinary Output Research for Actual and International Issue (Morfai Journal) Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Konstitusi Indonesia Law Review (ILREV) Jurnal Hukum Pidana dan Kriminologi Ex Aequo Et Bono Journal of Law Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Journal of Law and Legal Reform JILS (Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies)
Nelson, Febby Mutiara
Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Indonesia Kampus UI Depok, Depok, Jawa Barat, 16424 Indonesia
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Chemical Engineering, Chemistry & Bioengineering Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Energy Engineering Environmental Science Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Materials Science & Nanotechnology Social Sciences Other

Published : 34 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 34 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4 
Asset Forfeiture through Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture and Management of Criminal Proceeds Assets: A Comparative Study with the United States and Thailand Anisa, Tasya; Nelson, Febby Mutiara
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.v23i2.4183

Abstract

Confiscation is based on the principle that the proceeds of crime must be confiscated, because the convicted person should not benefit from the crime he committed. The procedure for handling confiscated property is something that needs to be regulated. So it is very important in a rule to determine who is responsible for taking the seized goods and holding them, where they should be stored, and what will be done with them. This paper compares and contrasts the NCB non-conviction based asset forfeiture rules owned by Indonesia, the United States and Thailand as well as the responsibilities in managing assets based on the results of confiscation and confiscation owned by these countries. The selection of the United States as a comparison country in this paper is based on the fact that countries that adhere to the common law legal system have commonly practiced the concept of NCB asset forfeiture as an activity in confiscating and seizing assets and the United States has been implementing the concept for decades. While in the Southeast Asian region, Thailand is one of the countries that has long implemented the concept of NCB asset forfeiture and has an independent institution
The Conflict between Mining Law and Anti-Corruption Law in Indonesia’s Extractive Sector: A Study of Legal Justification and Judicial Reasoning Pandiangan, Marolop; Harkrisnowo, Harkristuti; Nelson, Febby Mutiara
Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Konstitusi Vol. 9 Issue 1 (2026) Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Konstitusi
Publisher : Faculty of Sharia, Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Profesor Kiai Haji Saifuddin Zuhri Purwokerto, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24090/volksgeist.v9i1.14411

Abstract

Corruption in Indonesia’s extractive industry has generated significant state revenue losses, regulatory distortions, and environmental harm. A key legal issue arises from the concurrent use of the Anti-Corruption Law and the Mineral and Coal Mining Law in addressing offenses within the sector, raising questions regarding legal certainty and the proper application of the lex specialis principle. This study examines the legal justification for applying the Anti-Corruption Law to mining-related offenses, analyzes judicial reasoning in relevant court decisions, and formulates a framework for criminal policy reconstruction. This research employs a normative legal method, combining statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. It critically analyzes legislative frameworks alongside selected judicial decisions to identify patterns of interpretation and enforcement. The study further situates these findings within theories of lex specialis, legal certainty, and utilitarian deterrence. The results demonstrate that the application of the Anti-Corruption Law is often justified by courts based on broader notions of state financial loss and deterrence objectives. However, this approach has led to interpretative inconsistencies, particularly in distinguishing between administrative violations under mining law and criminal acts qualifying as corruption. Such inconsistencies reflect an unresolved tension between sector-specific regulation and general anti-corruption enforcement. This study argues that the core issue lies not merely in normative overlap, but in the absence of clear doctrinal boundaries and coherent judicial standards. Accordingly, it proposes regulatory harmonization, strengthened interpretative guidelines, and an integrated criminal policy framework that combines penal, administrative, and restorative mechanisms to promote legal certainty, accountability, and sustainable governance in Indonesia’s extractive industry
Reconstructing The Role of Confiscation and Seizure in Realizing The Right to Restitution for Victims of Criminal Acts Ubwarin, Erwin; Nelson, Febby Mutiara; Jatna, R Narendra; Soplantila, Valentino Dinatra
LAW REFORM Vol 22, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : PROGRAM STUDI MAGISTER ILMU HUKUM FAKULTAS HUKUM UNIVERSITAS DIPONEGORO SEMARANG

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14710/lr.v22i1.73378

Abstract

The National Criminal Code (KUHP) and Law No.20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) have strengthened the recognition of victims’ rights, particularly with regard to restitution as an additional punishment. In practice, however, restitution has not been implemented optimally, resulting in many victims failing to obtain adequate compensation. The aims of this study are: 1) to identify and analyse the role of conventional seizure as evidence, and 2) to analyse and formulate the role of modern seizure as an instrument for restoring victims’ rights. Employing a doctrinal approach, this research produces descriptive legal analysis and prescriptive recommendations by formulating an expanded concept of seizure. The findings indicate that both the KUHP and the KUHAP regulate restitution as a victim’s right to material and immaterial compensation and recognise seizure as a legal instrument. However, there is no explicit regulation linking seizure directly to the fulfilment of restitution. Consequently, restitution remains difficult to enforce when perpetrators lack assets or refuse to comply. The study concludes that the concept of seizure must be expanded to include the broader seizure of perpetrators’ assets and the possibility of state-funded compensation to ensure that victims’ restitution rights are realised effectively, fairly and enforceably.
Reforming Contempt of Court Regulation in Indonesia: Addressing Indirect Interference and Trial by the Press Neisa Angrum Adisti; Febrian; Febby Mutiara Nelson
Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 10 Issue 1, January 2026
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.28946/slrev.v10i1.5065

Abstract

Contempt of court refers to acts threatening the dignity, independence, and integrity of the judicial process. In Indonesia, the regulatory treatment of contempt of court remains fragmented and incomplete. Existing provisions, including those in the Criminal Code, primarily focus on direct disruptions during court proceedings, while failing to address broader, subtler forms of interference adequately. This regulatory gap contributes to legal uncertainty and inconsistent enforcement. A notable omission is the lack of clear mechanisms to regulate indirect contempt, such as trial by the press, in which excessive or prejudicial media coverage can influence public opinion, undermine the presumption of innocence, and jeopardise judicial impartiality. This research examines the urgent need for a dedicated and comprehensive legal framework governing contempt of court in Indonesia, addressing the philosophical foundations, the urgency of enacting a specific and impartial regulation, and the limited scope of indirect forms of trial by the press under Indonesia's national Criminal Code. Employing normative legal research, this study draws upon statutory analysis, conceptual exploration, and comparative legal approaches. As a result, a comprehensive contempt of court statute is urgently needed not merely to shield judicial officers from insult, but to safeguard the right to a fair trial, legal certainty, and the continuous, unhindered administration of justice as core elements of the rule of law. Such legislation should protect the integrity and authority of the courts in a way that reinforces democratic accountability and restores public confidence in the judiciary as an institution, rather than serving as a blunt instrument to silence criticism or privilege judicial dignity over systemic transparency.
Co-Authors Aini, Abni Nur Andini, Priska Putri Anisa, Tasya Annisa Maudi Arsela Ari, Fransiska Athika Salsabilla Harahap Ayuningsih, Irma Reisalinda Azalia Delicia Dumanauw Basry, Arianisti Zulhanita Putri Choky Risda Ramadhan, Choky Risda Danusubroto, Alexia Sonia Edwin Ligasetiawan Emilka Nuradanta Fatmawati Parenrengi Febrian Harkristuti Harkrisnowo Intan Hendrawati Jatna, R Narendra Laras Adysti Nariswari Leonardus Agung Putra Utama Murni, Hidayati Nadya Farras Indriati Neisa Angrum Adisti Novian, Muhammad Pandiangan, Marolop Panji Purnama Pardede, Sonora Gokma Pasaribu, Juwita Patty Pricilla Amelinda Jacob Prosperiani, Maria Dianita Rafiqa Qurrata A’yun Riska Ruth Verarussy Rizky Adi Nugraha Saputra, Rakha Naufal Simanjuntak, Melva Retta Ruby Sondang, Esther Melinia Soplantila, Valentino Dinatra Tasya Anisa Topo Santoso Ubwarin, Erwin