Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
4.865
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Kertha Negara : Journal Ilmu Hukum Kertha Patrika JURNAL MAGISTER HUKUM UDAYANA Pandecta Yustisia JURISDICTIE Jurnal Hukum dan Syariah Unram Law Review Jurnal Health Sains International Journal of Social Service and Research Jurnal Interpretasi Hukum POLICY, LAW, NOTARY AND REGULATORY ISSUES (POLRI) Journal of Law, Poliitic and Humanities International Journal of Science and Environment West Science Interdisciplinary Studies West Science Interdisciplinary Studies Journal of Contemporary Law Studies Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum
Sagung Putri M. E. Purwani
Unknown Affiliation
Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Humanities Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology Chemical Engineering, Chemistry & Bioengineering Chemistry Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Dentistry Economics, Econometrics & Finance Environmental Science Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Mathematics Medicine & Pharmacology Nursing Physics Public Health Social Sciences Veterinary

Published : 27 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search
Journal : JURNAL MAGISTER HUKUM UDAYANA

 1 
The Enforcement of Environmental Criminal Law in Customary Law Community Sagung Putri M.E. Purwani
Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) Vol 11 No 1 (2022)
Publisher : University of Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/JMHU.2022.v11.i01.p13

Abstract

The purpose of this paper was to examine and analyze the regulation of criminal sanctions in environmental crimes by customary law community, and analyze customary law community policies in the settlement of environmental crimes. This paper was normative research with a statutory and conceptual approach. The results of the study indicated that Based on all the abovementioned, it can be concluded that the regulation of Environmental Criminal Enforcement by Customary Law Community has been regulated in the provisions of environmental laws and regulations, namely Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management, Law No. 41 of 1999 concerning Forestry, and Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry Number 32 of 2015 concerning Forests. Further, there are also environmental criminal laws which are regulated in other sectoral laws relating to the environment and natural resources. Regarding the Settlement of Environmental Crimes by Customary law community, it is done through efforts to arrange Deliberations and Restorations in the balance of nature and the environment that were previously damaged and polluted by customary law community. Thus, there is a need for recognition and management of customary forests that must be carried out professionally and sustainably based on local wisdom. Hence, it is expected to be able to improve equitable welfare.
PENGAWASAN NOTARIS OLEH MAJELIS PENGAWAS NOTARIS DAERAH PASCA PUTUSAN M.K.NO. 49/PUU-X/2012 Dewa Nyoman Rai Asmara Putra; Sagung Putri M.E Purwani
Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) Vol 5 No 4 (2016)
Publisher : University of Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (390.048 KB) | DOI: 10.24843/JMHU.2016.v05.i04.p11

Abstract

Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) No 30 Tahun 2014, pengawasan notaris dilakukan oleh Menteri, dan kata pengawasan di dalamnya termasuk juga mengenai pembinaan. Untuk melaksanakan tugas dimaksud oleh menteri, dalam hal ini Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia dibentuk Majelis Pengawas Notaris, yaitu suatu badan yang mempunyai kewenangan dan kewajiban untuk melakukan pengawasan dan pembinaan terhadap notaris. Pasal 66 ayat (1) UUJN menentukan: Untuk kepentingan proses peradilan, penyidik, penuntut umum, mengambil fotokopi minuta akta dan/atau surat-surat yang dilekatkan dalam minuta akta atau protokol notaris, serta pemanggilan notaris untuk hadir dalam pemeriksaan berkaitan dengan akta yang dibuatnya, atau protokol notaris, dengan persetujuan MPD. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusan nya Nomor 49/PUU-X/2012, menyatakan frase “dengan persetujuan Majelis Pengawas Daerah” pada Pasal 66 UUJN, adalah bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum. Permasalahan yuridis nya adalah: Apa saja wewenang MPD pasca putusan MK No. 49/PUU-X/2012 ? dan Bagaimana mekanisme pemeriksaan notaris oleh MPD? Dengan jenis penelitian hukum normatif permasalahan tersebut terjawab, bahwa Tugas dan wewenang MPD pasca Putusan MK. No. 49/PUU-X/2012 hanya untuk melakukan pemeriksaan berkala dan/atau jika dipandang perlu, serta melakukan pemeriksaan notaris jika ada pengaduan dari masyarakat. Tugas dan kewenangan notaris sebagaimana Pasal 66 UUJN, berdasarkan No. 2 Tahun 2014 sebagai UU Perubahan atas UUJN dilakukan oleh Majelis Kehormatan Notaris. Mengenai mekanisme pemeriksaan Notaris harus dilakukan sesuai dengan UUJN Nomor 30 Tahun 2004, UU Per UUJN No 2 Tahun 2014, Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Republik Indonesia Nomor M.02.PR.08.10 Tahun 2004 Tentang Tata Cara Pengangkatan Anggota, Pemberhentian Anggota, Susunan Organisasi, Tata Kerja, Dan Tata Cara Pemeriksaan Notaris; dan Keputusan Menteri Hukum Dan Hak Asasi Manusia Republik Indonesia No. M.39-PW.07.10 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pedoman Pelaksanaan Tugas Majelis Pengawas Notaris. The Law on Position of Notary (UUJN) No 30 Year 2014, the supervision of a notary is conducted by the Minister, and the supervisory word in it also includes the guidance. To carry out the duties referred to by the minister, in this case the Minister of Justice and Human Rights established the Supervisory Board of Notary, which is an agency having the authority and obligation to conduct supervision and guidance on the notary. Article 66 Paragraph (1) UUJN determines: For the purposes of the judicial process, investigators, prosecutors, taking photocopies of minas deeds and / or letters embedded in minority deed or notary protocols, and notarial notes to be present in the examination relating to the deeds they make , Or notary protocol, with the approval of the MPD. The Constitutional Court in its decision No. 49 / PUU-X / 2012 states that the phrase "with the approval of the Regional Supervisory Board" in Article 66 UUJN, is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and has no legal force. The juridical issue is: What are the powers of the MPD after the Constitutional Court's decision No. 49 / PUU-X / 2012? And What is the mechanism of notary examination by MPD? With this type of normative legal research the problem is answered, that the task and authority of the MPD after the Constitutional Court Decision. No. 49 / PUU-X / 2012 only to conduct periodic and / or deemed necessary inspections and to conduct a notary examination if there is a complaint from the public. Duties and authorities of a notary as referred to in Article 66 UUJN, based on No. 2 of 2014 as Law on Amendment of UUJN is conducted by the Honorary Board of Notary. Regarding the mechanism of inspection of a Notary must be done in accordance with UUJN Number 30 Year 2004, UU Per UUJN No 2 Year 2014, Regulation of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia Number M.02.PR.08.10 Year 2004 About Procedures for Member Appointment, Dismissal of Members, Organizational Structure, Work Procedures, and Procedure of Notary Inspection; And Decree of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia No. M.39-PW.07.10 of 2004 on Guidelines for the Implementation of Duties of the Notary Supervisory Board.
Kebijakan Hukum Pidana terhadap Pelaku Penyalahguna Narkotika yang Mengulagi Perbuatannya Setelah Menjalani Sanksi Rehabilitasi I Nyoman Agus Adi Priantara; Sagung Putri M.E Purwani
Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) Vol 12 No 4 (2023)
Publisher : University of Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/JMHU.2023.v12.i04.p16

Abstract

In Indonesia, there is a double track system in resolving narcotics cases, namely the imposition of laws in the form of action sanctions in the form of rehabilitation and criminal sanctions in the form of imprisonment. However, in reality law enforcers tend to impose criminal sanctions on narcotics addicts because they focus on the guilt of their actions and rarely apply rehabilitation sanctions. This study aims to examine and analyze legal policies for addicts or narcotics abusers based on Law Number 35 of 2009 and legal policies against narcotics abusers who repeat their actions. This study uses normative legal research with the types of approaches used include statutory approaches, case approaches, and legal concept analysis approaches related to narcotics crimes. This study explains that no legal regulations or policies have been found against addicts or narcotics abusers who repeat their actions, giving rise to empty norms that make it difficult for law enforcement officials to impose appropriate sanctions on these problems. The imposition of criminal sanctions on narcotics addicts and abusers is considered less effective in enforcement, so that in the future it is hoped that law-making apparatus can make a policy that can be useful for narcotics addicts and abusers. In determining future legal policies for narcotics addicts or abusers who repeat their actions after undergoing rehabilitation sanctions, several comparisons can be made, namely, legal comparisons through the RKUHP Criminal, Narcotics Bill and Comparison of Laws from various countries to be used as a reference for future legal formulations. Di Indonesia mengenal double track system dalam penyelesaian kasus narkotika, yaitu penjatuhan hukum berupa sanksi tindakan berupa rehabilitasi serta sanksi pidana berupa pemenjaraan. Namun dalam kenyataanya para penegak hukum cenderung menjatuhkan sanksi pemidanaan terhadap pecandu narkotika karena mereka berfokus kepada kesalahan atas perbuatannya dan jarang menerpkan sanksi rehabilitasi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji dan menganalisis kebijakan Hukum Bagi Pecandu Atau Penyalahguna Narkotika Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 serta kebijakan hukum terhadap penyalahguna mnarkotika yang mengulangi perbuatannya. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan jenis pendekatan yang digunakan meliputi pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan kasus, serta pendekatan analisis konsep hukum terkait tindak pidana narkotika. Studi ini menjelaskan bahwa tidak ditemukannya pengaturan atau kebijakan hukum terhadap pecandu atau penyalahguna narkotika yang mengulangi perbuatannya, sehingga menimbulkan norma kosong yang mempersulit aparat penegak hukum untuk menjatuhkan sanksi yang sesuai terhadap permasalahan tersebut. Penjatuhan sanksi pemidanaan terhada para pecandu dan penyalahguna narkotika dianggap kurang efektif dalam penegakannya, sehingga kedepannya diharapkan agar aparatur pembuat undang undang dapat membuat suatu kebijakan yang dapat berguna bagi para pecandu dan penyalahguna narkotika. Dalam menentukan kebijakan hukum ke depan terhadap pecandu atau penyalahguna narkotika yang kembali mengulangi perbuatannya setelah menjalani sanksi rehabilitasi dapat mempergunakan beberapa perbandingan yakni, perbandingan hukum melalui KUHP, RUU Narkotika dan Perbandingan Hukum dari berbagai negara untuk dijadikan acuan formulasi hukum kedepan.
Co-Authors A A Sagung Cahaya Dewi Savitri Anak Agung Ayu Anaya Widya Sukma Anak Agung Ayu Windah Wisnu Kesuma Sari Anak Agung Ngurah Wirasila Anak Agung Ngurah Yusa Darmadi Anak Agung Sinta Paramisuari Anggun Kharisma Dewi Bagus Gede Brahma Putra Darwin Jeremia Sitinjak Desak Putu Dewi Kasih Dewa Nyoman Rai Asmara Putra Dwipayana Putra, Kadek Angga Eriska Kurniati Sitio GDE MADE SWARDANA Gde Made Swardhana Hariyawan, Agus Sukma I Dewa Ayu Diah Anjani I G A Ayu Dewi Satyawati I Gusti Agung Mas Rwa Jayantiari, I Gusti Agung I Gusti Ayu Putri Kartika, I Gusti Ayu I Gusti Ketut Ariawan I Gusti Made Adika Kornia I Gusti Ngurah Nyoman Krisnadi Yudiantara I Kadek Niko Suardi I Ketut Rai Setiabudhi I Made Budi Arsika I Made Tjatrayasa I Made Walesa Putra I Nengah Maliarta I Nyoman Agus Adi Priantara I Nyoman Suyatna I Putu Gede Putra Sentana I Wayan Parsa Ida Bagus Miswadanta Pradaksa Ida Bagus Surya Dharma Jaya Juniati, Ni Ketut Kadek Ayu Trisnawati Kadek Novita Dwi Irianti Kadek Setia Budiawan Kadek Velantika Adi Putra Kadek Yogi Barhaspati Linawati Luh Amelia Savitri Luh Putu Divani Anggarani Mulyawan Made Sisca Anggreni Made Suardana, I Manuaba, Fajar N Wahyu Triashari Ni Desak Gede Sekar Widhiasih Ni Gusti Ayu Dyah Satyawati Ni Gusti Ayu Dyah Satyawati Ni Kadek Ayu Wistiani Ni Kadek Dwi Oktiapiani Ni Kadek Eniantari Ni Komang Hyang Permata Danu Asvatham Ni Luh Putu Ratih Sukma Dewi Ni Made Sutrisna Dewi Ni Nengah Adiyaryani Ni Putu Resha Arundari Ni Putu Tya Suindrayani Ni Putu Yulita Damar Putri Nyoman Kinandara Anggarita Putu Ayu Gayatri Putu Eka Oktaviani Putu Mas Ayu Cendana Wangi Putu Mery Lusyana Dewi Putu Mita Apsari Dewi Putu Reksa Rahmayanti Pratiwi Putu Ria Purnami Putu Trisna permana Radha Rani, Ni Made Dwi Rainer S.C. Sinaga Resae Novita Resta, Ngurah Wahyu Restiana, Adevia Ayu Robertus Dicky Armando Rohmatul Hajiriah Nurhayati Sagung Dinda Surya Paramitha Seri Karna, Kadek Yoga Maheswara Sutrisnawati, Gusti Ayu Eka Yosef Faizal Frans Yutika Tri Bhuana Dewi