Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.751
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Nagari Law Review Dialogia Iuridica LamLaj
Muh. Afdal Yanuar
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Penyelesaian Sengketa antara Konsumen dengan Pelaku Usaha yang Berbasis Pada Wanprestasi Atas Perjanjian Pembiayaan: (Studi Kasus: Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 481K/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2015) Muh. Afdal Yanuar
Dialogia Iuridica Vol. 13 No. 2 (2022): Journal Dialogia Iuridica Vol 13, No.2 Year 2022
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Maranatha Christian University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.28932/di.v13i2.4459

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to describe the object and mechanism for disputes resolution mechanism between consumers and business actors based on Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection, and disputes resolution between consumers and business actors based on default on financing agreements. (Case Study of Supreme Court Decision Number 481K/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2015). The background issue in this paper is because there is still a Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK) which considers that disputes between consumers and business actors based on financing agreements are ‘consumer disputes’, when it should be a ‘default dispute’ that is tried in the District Court. This paper uses normative research with a statute, conceptual, and case approach. The results of this paper illustrate that the object of dispute between business actors and consumers as determined under the Consumer Protection Law is 'consumer disputes', that is disputes arising from consumers suffering damage, and/or consumer losses due to consuming goods and/or services produced by business actors. Furthermore, the mechanism for resolving consumer disputes can be done by, consumers file a consumer dispute lawsuit which is resolved in the form of non-litigation (through BPSK) or litigation (through the district court). Moreover, in the context of a dispute between a consumer and a business actors based on a default on a financing agreement, the lawsuit submitted is a 'defaults' lawsuit, which is directly submitted to the District Court. This has also become a legal consideration in the Supreme Court's Decision Number 481K/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2015, and several jurisprudence related to the case.
Posibilitas Eksistensi Jenis Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang Stand Alone Money Laundering Di Indonesia Muh. Afdal Yanuar
Nagari Law Review Vol 5 No 1 (2021): Nagari Law Review
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Andalas University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25077/nalrev.v.5.i.1.p.23-40.2021

Abstract

Refer to the Constitutional Court Decision’s Number 77/PUU-XII/2014, it can be understood that money laundering offences is a follow up crimes. So that, every prosecution and proving to money laundering offences are carried out, the property which suspected as an object of money laundering offences must link to crime, even in terms of the predicate offences is not proven first, because of the money launderer is not a materiele dader of predicate offences, as an Article 69 Money Laundering Laws contextualization’s. In the context of money laundering proving as an Article 69 Money Laundering Laws, the linkages between money laundering offences and proceeds of crime and predicate offences, must be described. Because of in stand alone money laundering proving and prosecuting money laundering offences without also necessarily proving and prosecuting the predicate offences was probably, for example, if predicate offences of money laundering was unsufficient evidence or unable to proven, so that the existence of stand alone money laundering in Indonesia in status quo refer to Constitutional Court Decision’s Number 77/PUU-XII/2014 is not possible. However, the existence of stand alone money laundering can be possible here in Indonesia, if in the future (ius constituendum): (a) there is provision in money laundering’s criminal procedure laws which regulated in the laws, that at least recognize of stand alone money laundering’s existence; or (b) The Criminal Proving System which recognized in Indonesia in originally set forth negative wettelijk system, transformed into the conviction intime system or laconviction raisonee system
ANTI-TIPPING OFF PERSPECTIVE TO TARGET COMPANY BANK’S SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTION REPORT IN MERGER ACTIVITY Muh. Afdal Yanuar
Lambung Mangkurat Law Journal Vol. 6 No. 2 (2021): September
Publisher : Program magister Kenotariatan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lambung Mangkurat

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32801/abc.v6i2.116

Abstract

The purpose of this study is, to explain the legal concept and regulation of anti-tipping off in the banking sector, and to explore about the position of the Suspicious Transaction Report belonging to the target company bank in the merger activity based on anti-tipping off provisions. This is Normative legal Research with a statutory approach, a conceptual approach and a comparative approach. The background of the problem in this paper is, there is no strong legitimacy about definition and limitation of the meaning of the phrase ‘other parties’ in article 12 paragraph (1) Anti Money Laundering Law, which regulate about anti tipping off, wether the absorbing company bank is the ‘other parties’ of target company bank on the merger activity or not, when target company bank delivered it suspicious transaction reports to absorbing company bank prior to the merger. The results and discussion concluded that Anti-tipping off is a provision that prohibits tipping off. Tipping off itself is an action by a senior officer or Management or Employee of the Reporting Party (inter alia, Bank) to disclose facts related to a Suspicious Transaction Report that has been reported to Financial Intelligence Unit (in casu, PPATK). This is concrete and manifested in the provisions of Article 12 paragraph (1) of the Anti Money Laundering Law. Besides that, Viewed from the anti-tipping off perspective, all the rights owned by the target company Bank prior to the merger, ex officio, become the rights of the absorbing company, since the target company Bank legally merges into a part of the absorbing company. Based on that, it can be concluded that with respect to merger activities, the absorbing company banks are not ‘other Parties’ from the target company Bank
Co-Authors