Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.817
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Nagari Law Review Journal of Law and Policy Transformation Jurnal Fundamental Justice
Emiliya Febriyani
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Perbandingan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Direksi Di Indonesia Dan Belanda Emiliya Febriyani
Nagari Law Review Vol 4 No 2 (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.4.i.2.p.210-224.2021

Abstract

Directors are the most important organ in a company. But in practice, Directors often experience dilemmas in managing the company. On the one hand, Directors are required to make business decisions for the profit of the company. But on the other hand, if the loss causes a loss to the company, then the directors can be blamed and even held liable for criminal responsibility because it is deemed to have complied with the crime of corruption. That thing seems as if it has shown the gray area of law enforcement on directors' business decisions, which could be civil nature, but charged as criminal cases. For this reason, this paper compares the forms of criminal liability of Directors in Indonesia and the Netherlands. This paper uses a normative legal research method by using secondary data consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials relating to the comparison of criminal liability of Directors in Indonesia and the Netherlands which are analyzed using a comparative approach
Corporate Criminal Liability in Jordan, Australia, and Indonesia: A Comparative Analysis of Doctrines and Recent Developments Emiliya Febriyani; Jamin Ginting; Basuki Rekso Wibowo
Journal of Law and Policy Transformation Vol 10 No 2 (2025)
Publisher : Universitas Internasional Batam

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37253/jlpt.v10i2.11527

Abstract

This study analyzes the development of corporate criminal liability in Jordan, Australia, and Indonesia through a comparative doctrinal approach, focusing on the shift from the traditional identification doctrine toward models that attribute criminal fault to corporate culture. The research applies a normative legal method combined with comparative legal analysis, examining the Jordanian Penal Code, the Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) and the Australian Law Reform Commission Report No. 136 (2020), Law No. 1 of 2023 on the New Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP), and Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2023, alongside scholarly literature on identification doctrine, vicarious liability, strict liability, and corporate culture theory. The findings show that Jordan retains a classical identification-based model, holding corporations liable only when fault can be linked to individuals acting as the “directing mind and will.” Australia has adopted the most advanced framework through Section 12.3 of the Criminal Code, which attributes fault based on corporate culture and is strengthened by proposals for system-of-conduct offences. Indonesia occupies a transitional position: although the Law No. 1 of 2023  formally recognizes corporations as criminal subjects, its fault-attribution structure remains hybrid, and organizational fault is only expressly acknowledged sectorally through Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2023. The study concludes that effective corporate criminal liability depends on a legal system’s capacity to conceptualize fault as systemic failure rather than individual wrongdoing.
Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi Atas Kebocoran Data Pribadi di Indonesia: Studi Komparatif dengan Amerika Serikat dan Uni Eropa Devany Anggriani; Emiliya Febriyani; Ampuan Situmeang
Jurnal Fundamental Justice Vol. 7 No. 1 (2026): Maret 2026
Publisher : Universitas Bumigora

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30812/fundamental.v7i1.6237

Abstract

Kebocoran data pribadi oleh entitas korporasi digital di Indonesia terus meningkat. Mekanisme pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi belum berjalan efektif sehingga menimbulkan kekhawatiran terhadap perlindungan hak privasi warga negara di era digital. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis pengaturan dan penerapan pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi terhadap kebocoran data pribadi di Indonesia serta membandingkannya dengan praktik di Uni Eropa dan Amerika Serikat. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perbandingan hukum dan studi kasus. Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan, putusan hukum, dan dokumen terkait yang dianalisis secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa di Uni Eropa, korporasi dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban pidana maupun administratif melalui General Data Protection Regulation, dengan sanksi administratif sebesar 10–20 juta Euro atau 2–4% dari omzet global, sementara penentuan sanksi pidana diatur oleh negara anggota. Di Amerika Serikat, korporasi dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban pidana berdasarkan Federal Trade Commission Act dan aturan pidana federal, yang memberikan dasar hukum kuat untuk menindak perusahaan yang lalai melindungi data pribadi. Sebaliknya, di Indonesia, meskipun telah memiliki Undang-Undang Perlindungan Data Pribadi dan KUHP baru, mekanisme pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi belum efektif karena ketiadaan lembaga pengawas independen dan penegakannya cenderung simbolik. Kondisi ini menegaskan urgensi penguatan mekanisme pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi serta pembentukan otoritas pengawas independen guna memperkuat perlindungan data pribadi di Indonesia. 
Co-Authors Basuki Rekso Wibowo Devany Anggriani Jamin Ginting Situmeang, Ampuan