Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON LANGUAGE, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION STUDIES Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum LEGALITY IBLAM Law Review Jurnal Ilmu Kenotariatan
Prija Djatmika
Brawijaya University
Humanities Education Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 4 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
IMPLIKASI YURIDIS PERJANJIAN PERKAWINAN YANG DIBUAT SELAMA DALAM IKATAN PERKAWINAN TERHADAP UTANG BERSAMA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 69/PUU-XIII/2015 Priesty Yustika Putri; Prija Djatmika; Dhiana Puspitawati
Legality : Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Vol. 26 No. 1 (2018): Maret
Publisher : Faculty of Law, University of Muhammadiyah Malang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Under the provisions of Article 29 of Law Number 1 Year 1974 on Marriage, a marriage agreement may only be made before or at the time of marriage. However, after the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015, marriage agreements may also be made during the period of marriage ties. The making of this marriage agreement certainly affects the joint property of husband and wife obtained in the marriage period before the marriage agreement is made. Including if the couple also has a debt together. This then raises problems related to debt settlement. The purpose of this study is to determine the juridical implications of marriage agreements made during the marriage bonds to the joint debt post-Decision of the Constitutional Court. This research is classified as normative juridical research using the concept of law and conceptual. The results of the study show that after the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015, which stipulates that a marriage agreement may be made during the period of marriage bonds related to the responsibility of the joint debt repayment arising prior to the marriage agreement, the settlement may be contracted as per the second agreement the husband and wife. This is because there are no rules that prohibit the existence of such clauses to be set forth in the marriage agreement. However, if a marriage agreement in which the settlement of the joint debt will result in harm to a third party then the marriage agreement is not allowed, as regulated in Article 29 paragraph (4) Act 1/1974.
Implementation of the Article 32 of Government Regulation Number 24 of 2016 Concerning Land Deed Official Honorarium: Study at the land deed official office located in the working area in situbondo Malik Hariyanto; Prija Djatmika; Diah Aju Wisnuwardhani
Jurnal Ilmu Kenotariatan Vol. 5 No. 2: Nov 2024
Publisher : Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19184/jik.v5i2.52971

Abstract

The regulation regarding honorarium does not mention a definite amount or proportion, but only determines the upper limit preceded by the word “may not exceed” 1% (one percent) of the transaction price stated in the deed as stipulated in Article 32 paragraph (1) of Government Regulation No. 24 of 2016 amending Government Regulation No. 37 of 1998 on the Regulation of the Position of Land Deed Makers. This certainly raises problems related to the absence of certainty regarding the amount of honorarium so that it allows for differences in rates between PPATs with one another. This research was conducted with the aim of revealing whether the implementation of the determination of PPAT honorarium carried out by a PPAT at the PPAT Office located in the Working Area in Situbondo is in accordance with the provisions of Law Number 24 of 2016 Article 32 concerning PPAT Honorarium and the factors that hinder the implementation of Article 32 of Law Number 24 of 2016 concerning PPAT honorarium. This research is designed using juridical-empirical research methods. The results of this study indicate that the implementation of honorarium in Situbondo district is not fully in accordance with the provisions of Article 32 of Law Number 24 of 2016 concerning PPAT honorarium. Factors causing obstacles to the implementation of the provisions of Law Number 24 of 2016 Article 32 concerning PPAT Honorarium in Situbondo because the rules do not also provide a salary for the PPAT. KEYWORDS: Honorarium, PPAT, Deed
Independence of Penal Mediators: Efforts to Realize Impartial Restorative Justice in Indonesia I Wayan Prema Ardhaxena; Prija Djatmika
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON LANGUAGE, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION STUDIES Vol 10, No 1 (2026): International Journal on Language, Research (Law) Education Studies
Publisher : State Islamic University of North Sumatra Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47006/ijlres.v10i1.28949

Abstract

Keadilan restoratif di Indonesia bertujuan untuk menggeser paradigma hukum dari retributif ke restoratif, menekankan rehabilitasi daripada sekadar pemenjaraan. Namun, implementasinya saat ini masih terhambat oleh kurangnya regulasi spesifik mengenai kualifikasi dan independensi mediator pidana. Studi ini menganalisis urgensi mediator pidana independen dan merumuskan alternatif regulasi untuk memastikan imparsialitas dalam sistem peradilan pidana. Dengan menggunakan metodologi penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan legislatif, konseptual, dan komparatif, studi ini meneliti kesenjangan hukum antara regulasi sektoral yang ada dan standar internasional. Temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa praktik saat ini, di mana petugas penegak hukum sekaligus bertindak sebagai mediator, menciptakan konflik peran yang mengancam netralitas dan kepercayaan publik. Tidak seperti standar komprehensif dalam mediasi perdata, mediasi pidana di Indonesia kurang memiliki sertifikasi dan pengawasan profesional yang memadai. Oleh karena itu, studi ini menyimpulkan bahwa pembentukan model untuk mediator independen bersertifikat sangat penting. Model ini harus diintegrasikan ke dalam revisi Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (Rancangan Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana) untuk mencegah campur tangan kelembagaan dan memastikan bahwa proses keadilan restoratif mencapai penyembuhan sejati bagi korban, pelaku, dan masyarakat sambil tetap menjunjung tinggi prinsip pengadilan yang adil.
The Urgency of Regulating Asset Recovery at the District Attorney Level to Ensure the Exclusionary Rules Principle in Corruption Crimes Fredi Wahyu Putra Adhyaksa; Prija Djatmika; Fachrizal Afandi
IBLAM LAW REVIEW Vol. 6 No. 1 (2026): IBLAM LAW REVIEW
Publisher : Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat (LPPM IBLAM)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52249/ilr.v6i1.641

Abstract

Corruption is categorized as an extraordinary crime that requires extraordinary measures. One important strategy is asset recovery to compensate for state losses. However, the absence of explicit regulations regarding the principle of exclusionary rules in Indonesian positive law has caused disharmony between theory and practice. Purposes of the Research: This study aims to analyze the implications of asset recovery regulations on the application of exclusionary rules in the enforcement of criminal acts of corruption. Methods of the Research: This study uses a normative juridical method with a legislative and conceptual approach, focusing on the analysis of regulations and the authority of the District Attorney's Office related to asset recovery. Results / Main Findings / Novelty/Originality of the Research:The results of the study show that the lack of regulations and SOPs at the District Attorney's Office level has the potential to weaken the legitimacy of law enforcement. This condition emphasizes the need for comprehensive regulations that explicitly include the principle of exclusionary rules. In addition, the establishment of an Asset Recovery Section in the District Attorney's Office is necessary to ensure effectiveness, legal certainty, and justice in combating corruption.
Co-Authors Dhiana Puspitawati Diah Aju Wisnuwardhani Fachrizal Afandi Fredi Wahyu Putra Adhyaksa I Wayan Prema Ardhaxena Malik Hariyanto Priesty Yustika Putri