Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
10.88
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JPTK: Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi dan Kejuruan Dinamika Hukum Spektrum Hukum Morality :Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Anterior Jurnal Unes Law Review Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Tambun Bungai MAGISTRA Law Review Jurnal Ilmiah Dunia Hukum ADHKI: Journal of Islamic Family Law Masyarakat Berdaya dan Inovasi Community Development Journal: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Jurnal Analisis Hukum Belom Bahadat : Jurnal Hukum Agama Hindu Prophetic Law Review International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS) Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE Fiat Iustitia: Jurnal Hukum Journal Of Human And Education (JAHE) Journal Evidence Of Law Fiat Iustitia : Jurnal Hukum Journal of Law, Poliitic and Humanities The International Conference on Education, Social Sciences and Technology (ICESST) Indonesian Journal of Community Services Cel Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies Innovative: Journal Of Social Science Research Journal of Constitutional Law Society (JCLS) Journal of Progressive Law and Legal Studies MILRev: Metro Islamic Law Review Al-Zayn: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial & Hukum Journal of Innovative and Creativity Focus Journal Law Review Jurnal Medika: Medika Journal of Transcendental Law Palangka Law Review Journal of International Islamic Law, Human Right and Public Policy Dinamika Sosial: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Dan Transformasi Kesejahteraan Sultan Adam : Jurnal Hukum dan Sosial Ulil Albab Green Social: International Journal of Law and Civil Affairs Prosiding Seminar Nasional Ilmu Teknik Indonesia Media Law Review Proceeding of the International Conference on Law and Human Rights Prosiding Seminar Nasional Ilmu Hukum Jurnal Bakti UPPR KREATIF: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Nusantara Proceeding International Conference on Digital Education and Social Science Kertha Patrika Open Access DRIVERset Discourse on Law and Society Journal of Civil Criminal Law Yuriska : Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum
Satriya Nugraha
Universitas Palangka Raya
Religion Aerospace Engineering Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Dentistry Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Electrical & Electronics Engineering Engineering Environmental Science Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Mathematics Medicine & Pharmacology Neuroscience Nursing Physics Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 98 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 98 Documents
Search

 6   7   8   9   10 
Judicial Disparities in Premeditated Murder Cases: Legal Certainty in the Interpretation of Articles 338 and 340 of the Indonesian Criminal Code Tanto Satryatama; Andika Wijaya; Satriya Nugraha; Rizki Setyobowo Sangalang
Journal Evidence Of Law Vol. 5 No. 2 (2026): Journal Evidence Of Law (Agustus)
Publisher : CV. Era Digital Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59066/jel.v5i2.2425

Abstract

Judicial disparities in homicide cases involving indications of premeditation continue to challenge legal certainty in Indonesia's criminal justice system. Previous studies have primarily examined sentencing disparity or the interpretation of Article 340 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) in individual cases, but have not systematically explained the relationship between legal certainty, judicial discretion, and judicial reasoning through comparative analysis of judicial decisions. This study addresses that gap by analysing inconsistencies in the interpretation of the element "with prior planning" (dengan rencana terlebih dahulu) through a normative juridical method employing statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. The analysis focuses on Decision Number 230/Pid.B/2023/PN Sda and compares it with four homicide decisions rendered between 2021 and 2024 involving comparable factual circumstances. The findings reveal five principal factors contributing to judicial disparity: (1) the absence of objective parameters for interpreting Article 340 of the KUHP; (2) broad judicial subjectivity in assessing the offender's psychological condition; (3) the lack of interpretative guidelines issued by the Supreme Court; (4) inconsistency in judicial precedent concerning comparable cases; and (5) divergent interpretations regarding the interval between the formation of intent and the execution of the offence. These factors result in inconsistent legal qualifications and sentencing outcomes despite materially similar facts. The study's theoretical contribution lies in integrating the perspectives of legal certainty, judicial discretion, ratio decidendi, and sentencing disparity into a unified analytical framework for evaluating judicial interpretation of premeditation. Its practical contribution is the formulation of four cumulative objective indicators—weapon preparation, victim surveillance, preparation for escape or concealment, and sufficient time for rational reflection—as interpretative guidelines to support consistent application of Article 340. Accordingly, the study recommends the adoption of these indicators through a Supreme Court Regulation (Peraturan Mahkamah Agung—PERMA) to strengthen legal certainty while preserving judicial independence in homicide adjudication.
Reformulation of the Regulation of the Criminal Offence of Refusing to Testify as a Witness in the Reform of Indonesian Criminal Law Hank Mengket, Stephen; Wijaya, Andika; Setyobowo Sangalang, Rizki; Nugraha, Satriya
Journal Evidence Of Law Vol. 5 No. 2 (2026): Journal Evidence Of Law (Agustus)
Publisher : CV. Era Digital Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59066/jel.v5i2.2433

Abstract

This study examines the reformulation of the criminal offence of refusing to testify under Indonesian criminal law and proposes a rights-based graduated liability model that reserves criminal punishment for deliberate and persistent refusal after procedural safeguards, witness protection, and less restrictive measures have proven ineffective. Employing normative juridical research with statutory and conceptual approaches, the study analyzes the National Criminal Code, criminal procedural law, relevant criminal law doctrines, and the legal framework governing witness rights and obligations through descriptive and prescriptive methods. The findings reveal that the existing regulation risks overcriminalization because it does not sufficiently distinguish between culpable refusal to comply with a lawful obligation, the lawful exercise of the privilege to refuse testimony (hak ingkar) or the privilege against self-incrimination, and excusable non-compliance arising from compelling force, serious threats, or objectively unavoidable circumstances. Although the criminalization of unjustified refusal possesses philosophical, sociological, and juridical legitimacy in protecting the administration of justice, its application must remain subject to the principles of legality, culpability, proportionality, subsidiarity, and human rights protection. As an ius constituendum, this study proposes a graduated regulatory framework consisting of procedural clarification and renewed summons, protection intervention where threats or vulnerability exist, proportionate non-penal compliance measures, and criminal sanctions only as an ultimum remedium. The theoretical novelty of this study lies in reconceptualizing refusal to testify through a rights-based criminalization framework that integrates the witness’s legal obligation to participate in judicial proceedings with the state’s reciprocal obligation to guarantee procedural rights and effective protection. This reformulation provides clearer normative boundaries for distinguishing punishable refusal from legally protected or excusable non-compliance, thereby strengthening legal certainty while preventing the overcriminalization of vulnerable witnesses.
Reformulation of the Offence of Polygamy Without the Wife's Consent under Indonesia's 2023 Criminal Code: A Normative Legal Analysis Pardomuan Putra Andespa Tambunan; Ivans Januardy; Satriya Nugraha; Andika Wijaya
Journal Evidence Of Law Vol. 5 No. 2 (2026): Journal Evidence Of Law (Agustus)
Publisher : CV. Era Digital Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59066/jel.v5i2.2435

Abstract

The Indonesian legal system establishes monogamy as the general principle of marriage while permitting limited exceptions through judicial authorization and the wife's consent under the Marriage Law. The enactment of the 2023 Indonesian Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana/KUHP) reformulates the offence of unauthorized polygamy, creating new legal challenges concerning criminalization, legal certainty, and the relationship between criminal law and family law. Previous studies have predominantly examined polygamy from family law, Islamic law, or criminal law perspectives in isolation, leaving limited analysis of the criminalization rationale, comparative legal policy, and normative harmonization between the 2023 Criminal Code and the Marriage Law. This study aims to analyze the normative construction of the offence of polygamy without the wife's consent, evaluate its criminal law policy rationale, and develop an ideal framework for its reformulation within Indonesia's national legal system. This study employs normative juridical research using statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. Primary legal materials comprise the 2023 Indonesian Criminal Code, the Marriage Law, constitutional jurisprudence, judicial decisions, and relevant legal doctrines, which are analyzed through qualitative prescriptive methods using grammatical, systematic, and teleological interpretation. The findings reveal that the reformulated offence reflects a shift in criminal law policy from protecting the formal legality of marriage toward safeguarding women's rights and family integrity. However, three principal weaknesses remain: the ambiguous legal meaning of the wife's consent, the absence of clear boundaries between administrative violations and criminal offences, and normative disharmony between the Criminal Code and the Marriage Law, creating the potential for inconsistent law enforcement and overcriminalization. This study contributes theoretically by developing a rights-based criminalization framework grounded in proportionality, legal certainty, and human rights protection, while proposing a conceptual model integrating criminal law and family law to guide future harmonization of the 2023 Indonesian Criminal Code and the Marriage Law.
TINJAUAN HUKUM PIDANA TERHADAP DAUR ULANG NOMOR TELEPON SELULER DI INDONESIA Anatasya Christina Pattipeilohy; Rizki Setyobowo Sangalang; Satriya Nugraha; Indang Sulastri
SULTAN ADAM: Jurnal Hukum dan Sosial Vol 4 No 2 (2026): Juli-Desember 2026
Publisher : Yayasan Pendidikan Tanggui Baimbaian

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.71456/sultan.v4i2.2174

Abstract

Pengaturan daur ulang nomor telepon seluler di Indonesia dalam Peraturan Menteri Komunikasi dan Informatika Nomor 14 Tahun 2018 tentang Rencana Dasar Teknis Telekomunikasi Nasional masih menyisakan celah esensial, karena hanya membatasi masa tenggang 60 hari tanpa mewajibkan pembersihan data (data cleansing) dan pemutusan tautan (unlinking). Hal ini memunculkan kekosongan norma (leemten in het recht) yang membuka celah terjadinya kejahatan penyalahgunaan data pribadi pengguna lama secara sistemik. Menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual, penelitian ini bertujuan mengualifikasikan tindak pidana yang timbul serta membedah batasan pertanggungjawabannya. Hasil analisis menemukan bahwa eksploitasi nomor daur ulang memenuhi tiga kualifikasi pidana: tindak pidana siber (akses ilegal dan manipulasi data), perolehan data pribadi secara melawan hukum, dan penipuan. Batasan pertanggungjawaban didistribusikan secara proporsional: pengguna baru dipidana sebagai pelaku utama (dader) atas dasar kesengajaan sebagai maksud (dolus directus) atau kesengajaan dengan sadar kemungkinan (dolus eventualis) sementara operator seluler dijerat pidana korporasi atas dasar kelalaian berat (culpa lata) dan diposisikan sebagai pencipta peluang kejahatan (gelegenheidschepper). Penelitian ini merekomendasikan pengkonstruksian ketiga kualifikasi tindak pidana tersebut secara kumulatif sebagai landasan normatif utama, serta perlunya konstruksi pembaruan regulasi (legal reform) yang memuat norma imperatif pembersihan data (data cleansing) dan pemutusan tautan (unlinking) guna menutup celah kelalaian berat (culpa lata) pada pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi telekomunikasi.
CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW OF THE RIGHT TO EDUCATION: AN ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION NO. 3/PUU-XXII/2024: TINJAUAN KONSTITUSIONAL TENTANG HAK ATAS PENDIDIKAN: ANALISIS KEPUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSIONAL NOMOR 3/PUU-XXII/2024 Rengga Kusuma Putra; Retno Saraswati; Bagus Hermanto; Lita Tyesta Addy Listya Wardhani; Satriya Nugraha
Constitutional Law Society Vol. 5 No. 1 (2026): March
Publisher : Pusat Studi Konstitusi dan Perundang-undangan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36448/jcls.v5i1.136

Abstract

Decision No. 3/PUU-XXII/2024 of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia represents a significant development in the trajectory of Indonesian legal politics, particularly in relation to right to education as the constitutional protection enshrined in the 1945 Constitution. Although the ruling carries substantial implications for the interpretation of state obligations in the education sector, scholarly discussion has largely focused on the doctrinal aspects of constitutional adjudication, leaving limited attention to the broader fiscal and political implications of the decision within Indonesia’s governance framework. This study therefore seeks to examine the constitutional meaning and policy consequences of the ruling through a descriptive qualitative approach, with particular attention to the normative structure of the Court’s reasoning and the social justice values underlying its interpretation. The analysis focuses on how the Constitutional Court articulates the relationship between constitutional mandates, state responsibility, and the protection of individual educational rights within the broader framework of Indonesia’s welfare-oriented constitutionalism. The findings indicate that Decision No. 3/PUU-XXII/2024 strengthens the constitutional status of education as a positive right that requires active state intervention. At the same time, the ruling clarifies the scope of governmental obligations in ensuring equitable access to education while implicitly raising questions regarding fiscal allocation, institutional capacity, and policy prioritisation in the implementation of constitutional guarantees. By situating the decision within the broader discourse on the political theory of education law and the adjudication of socio-economic rights, this article contributes to the development of a normative framework that understands education not purely as a matter of public policy but as a constitutionally mandated instrument for achieving social justice. Ultimately, the study argues that the decision reflects a more responsive orientation in Indonesian legal politics, one that seeks to align constitutional interpretation with the pursuit of substantive equality in the national education system.
Kekosongan Pengaturan Online Dispute Resolution sebagai Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa di Indonesia Marsela Marsela; Satriya Nugraha
ULIL ALBAB : Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin Vol. 5 No. 9: Agustus 2026
Publisher : CV. Ulil Albab Corp

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56799/jim.v5i9.18909

Abstract

Perkembangan teknologi digital telah mendorong munculnya berbagai bentuk transaksi elektronik yang berpotensi menimbulkan sengketa hukum. Kondisi tersebut melahirkan Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) sebagai mekanisme alternatif penyelesaian sengketa yang memanfaatkan teknologi informasi dalam proses penyelesaiannya. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kekosongan pengaturan ODR dalam sistem hukum Indonesia serta urgensi penguatan regulasi guna mendukung efektivitas penyelesaian sengketa di era digital. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual. Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan, literatur hukum, dan jurnal ilmiah yang relevan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa meskipun Indonesia telah memiliki Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa serta Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik, belum terdapat pengaturan khusus yang mengatur pelaksanaan ODR secara komprehensif. Kekosongan pengaturan tersebut terlihat pada aspek definisi, prosedur pelaksanaan, pembuktian digital, dan kekuatan hukum hasil penyelesaian sengketa secara daring. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan penguatan regulasi untuk memberikan kepastian hukum, perlindungan bagi para pihak, dan mendukung optimalisasi ODR sebagai alternatif penyelesaian sengketa di era transformasi digital.
Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Risiko Diskriminasi Algoritma dalam Pelayanan Publik Berbasis Artificial Intelligence di Indonesia Marsela Marsela; Satriya Nugraha
ULIL ALBAB : Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin Vol. 5 No. 9: Agustus 2026
Publisher : CV. Ulil Albab Corp

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56799/jim.v5i9.19364

Abstract

Pemanfaatan Artificial Intelligence (AI) dalam pelayanan publik semakin berkembang seiring transformasi digital pemerintahan. Teknologi ini mampu meningkatkan efisiensi dan kualitas pelayanan, namun juga berpotensi menimbulkan diskriminasi algoritma akibat bias data dan proses pengambilan keputusan otomatis. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis perlindungan hukum terhadap risiko diskriminasi algoritma dalam pelayanan publik berbasis AI di Indonesia. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual. Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan, jurnal ilmiah, dan literatur yang relevan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa prinsip non-diskriminasi dan perlindungan hak warga negara telah diatur dalam berbagai regulasi, seperti Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 dan Undang-Undang Nomor 25 Tahun 2009 tentang Pelayanan Publik. Namun, belum terdapat pengaturan khusus yang mengatur penggunaan AI dalam pelayanan publik, terutama terkait transparansi algoritma, akuntabilitas, dan mekanisme perlindungan masyarakat dari keputusan otomatis yang berpotensi diskriminatif. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan penguatan regulasi guna menjamin penggunaan AI yang adil, transparan, dan akuntabel dalam penyelenggaraan pelayanan publik di Indonesia.
Urgency of Meaningful Participation in Law-Making Processes in the Digital Media Era Rengga Kusuma Putra; Retno Eko Mardani; Dian Ratu Ayu Uswatun Khasanah; Bagus Hermanto; Satriya Nugraha
Indonesia Media Law Review Vol. 5 No. 1 (2026): January-June, 2026
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/imrev.v5i1.48840

Abstract

Public participation is an essential element in democratic law-making, especially in the digital media era where information dissemination and public engagement occur rapidly. Despite the recognition of participation rights in Indonesia, meaningful engagement in legislative processes remains limited and largely procedural. This normative juridical study analyzes the urgency of institutionalizing meaningful public participation through the lens of digital media law. It examines the legal challenges and implications of digital participation in Indonesia. The findings reveal that while digital platforms have exponentially expanded public access to legislative discourse, current media regulations lack robust, legally binding mechanisms to ensure transparent and responsive public engagement. Consequently, digital participation is often rendered symbolic rather than substantive. The study concludes that reforming Indonesia's media law framework to establish strict digital participation standards is imperative. Strengthening these legal frameworks and digital mechanisms guarantees an inclusive, accountable, and truly meaningful democratic law-making process.
Co-Authors Agus Mulyawan, Agus Agustin, Rizky Ade Ahmad Alsharu Ali, Nuraliah Alpi Emkananta Tarigan Anatasya Christina Pattipeilohy Andhyka Triwan Putra Andika Wijaya Andika Wijaya Andika Wijaya, Andika Andrea Pieresky Anovanko, Uria Bernandus Aprilianto Aden Aprilyansyah, Mahdi Surya Ariyani Muljo Asmawi Aurora Maria Sagak Abel Aziz Widhi Nugroho Aziz Widhi Nugroho Bagus Hermanto Bagus Hermanto Bangas, Karlinae D. Br. Simanungkalit, Meldasyel Bulan Tri Hardianty Hasanah Cindi Kristian Mantikei Claudia Yuni Pramita Damanik, Eko Rinaldo Dea Ariesta Dedi Sorongan, Yuliana Mose, Reonaldy A Berikang Dhimas Ari Yudha Pratama Dhimas Ari Yudha Pratama Dian Karisma Duta Erlangga Eka Siskawati Eko Mardani, Retno Elidar Sari Elin Sudiarti Eny Susilowati Erni Dwi Puji Setyowati, Erni Dwi Puji Ervinda Ervinda Etriani, Etriani Fahrizal S.Siagian Farina, Thea Fauzi Rahman Fitria Husnatarina Fransisco, Fransisco Frensius Widi Hartono Fuji Syifa Safari Fuji Syifa Safari Gandik Prasetyo Budi Geofani Milthree Saragih Hadi Iskandar Hank Mengket, Stephen Hanrezi Dhania Ihwana As’ad Ika Purnama Sari Indah Widiastuti Indang Sulastri Indang Sulastri Infa Minggawati Ivans Januardy Ivans Januardy Jasiah Jasiah Jasiah Jhosef Deniro Tampubolon Juwita, Dewi Ratna Karisma, Dian Karlinae D. Bangas Khasanah, Dian Ratu Ayu Uswatun Kiki Kristanto Kiki Kristanto Kristanto, Kiki Kusuma Putra, Rengga Liberty, Amira Fauziah Lihandri, Yoga Linda Ikawati Linda Ikawati Lita Tyesta Addy Listya Wardhani Mantiqa, Yuka Latieful Mardani, Retno Eko Marolop Alfredo Siregar Marsela Marsela Marselino, Fernando Martriwati Meru, Agustinus Mikhael Stepanus Putra Mochammad Fabian Athaya Mugopal, Undang Muhamad Rapli Muhammad Izwar Fradiva Muhammad Thaariq Darmawan MULIDA HAYATI Nawa Angkasa, Nawa Nazira Azwa Nikmah Fitriah Nikmah Fitriah Nugroho, Aziz Widhi Nur Hidayah Nur Hidayati Nuraliah Ali Nuraliah Ali Nurhidayati Nurhidayati Nurhidayati Nurhidayati Nurhidayati Nuribadah Nuribadah Nuris Kushayati Odi Andanu Oktarindini, Devina Oktaviana Ayuningrum, Clara Pardomuan Putra Andespa Tambunan Pitriani Pratama, Diaz Jorge Putra, Rengga Kusuma Putri Fransiska Purnama P Rengga Kusuma Putra Rengga Kusuma Putra Rengga Kusuma Putra Rensi Rensi Reslawati Reslawati Retno Eko Mardani Retno Eko Mardani Retno Saraswasti Retno Saraswati Rianmahardhika Sahid Budiharseno Rizki Setyobowo Sangalang Rizki Setyobowo Sangalang Rizki Setyobowo Sangalang Rosmawiah Rosmawiah Rosmawiah Rosmawiah, Rosmawiah SALSABILA, ANNISA Sandra Leoni Prakasa Yakub Saraya, Sitta Sari , Fitri Maulina Selvia Nuriasari Seran, Diego Fernando Setiawan Noerdajasakti, Setiawan Setiawan, Diky Sibot, Yessiarie Silvany Silvia Arianti Siti Fatimah SITTA SARAYA Sofyan Jafar Sumiatie Susilowati, Eny Syariful Anam Tangkasiang, Yos Andy Tanto Satryatama Thea Farina Theresia Dessy Wardani Tiara Tobing, Rudyanti Dorotea Towip, Towip Wardani, Theresia Dessy Widhi Nugroho, Aziz Wulandari, Vicka Prama Yessiarie Silvanny Sibot Yolita Elgeriza Agustin Yongky Yongky Yosa Nikolas Notoe Saleh Yustha, Yulia Zulfikar, Ahmad Arif Zunan Setiawan