Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Privat Law Multidisciplinary Indonesian Center Journal
Dhikma Heradika
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Humanities Earth & Planetary Sciences Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Other

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
PEMBERDAYAAN UNDANG-UNDANG ARBITRASE SEBAGAI MODEL PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA BISNIS Dhikma Heradika; Adi Sulistiyono
Jurnal Privat Law Vol 6, No 1 (2018): JANUARI-JUNI
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/privat.v6i1.19260

Abstract

AbstractThis article aims to determine why the law of arbitration is still rarely used in the settlement of business disputes in Indonesia and to know the empowerment model legislation arbitration to resolve business disputes. This study is a descriptive empirical law research. This research location is in the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KADIN) Surakarta. The type and source of research data included primary data and secondary data. The technique of collecting data through interviews and literature study. Technique of data analysis is conducted qualitatively by interactive models. Based on results showed that Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution due to several factors which include no action yet the government as the Arbitration Act issued a legal product and ADR to promote such laws; The existence of Indonesian National Arbitration Board (BANI) has not been known to business people because there is no socialization conducted BANI to the Arbitration Act and ADR besides the organizational structure BANI no deal with education and socialization, although the BANI Procedural Regulation Article 1 (1 ) points d mention BANI assessment Organizing authorities and research and training / education regarding arbitration and alternative dispute resolution; and dispute settlement patterns businesses are now reliance by the courts. So the settlement of disputes through the courts into their comfort zone. Also in dispute settlement practice when business people consult their concerns to the advocates of no advocates who suggest the settlement of disputes through arbitration.Keywords: Empowerment, Rules of Arbitration, Business Dispute Resolution.AbstrakArtikel ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui mengapa undang-undang arbitrase masih jarang digunakan dalam penyelesaian sengketa bisnis di Indonesia dan untuk mengetahui model pemberdayaan undang-undang arbitrase untuk menyelesaikan sengketa bisnis. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum empiris yang bersifat deskriptif. Lokasi penelitian yaitu di Kamar Dagang dan Industri Indonesia (KADIN) Surakarta. Jenis dan sumber data penelitian ini meliputi data primer dan data sekunder. Teknik pengumpulan data melalui wawancara dan studi kepustakaan. Teknik analisis data dilakukan secara kualitatif dengan interaktif model. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian menunjukaan bahwa tidak berdayanya Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa dikarenakan beberapa faktor yang diantaranya adalah Belum ada tindakan pemerintah sebagai pihak yang mengeluarkan produk hukum UU Arbitrase dan APS untuk mensosialisasikan undang-undang tersebut; Keberadaan Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia (BANI) belum diketahui para pelaku bisnis dikarenakan tidak ada sosialisasi yang dilakukan BANI terhadap UU Arbitrase dan APS selain itu dalam struktur organisasi BANI tidak ada yang menangani masalah edukasi dan sosialisasi, meskipun dalam Peraturan Prosedur BANI Pasal 1 ayat (1) poin d menyebutkan BANI berwenang Menyelenggarakan pengkajian dan riset serta program pelatihan/ pendidikan mengenai arbitrase dan alternatif penyelesaian sengketa; dan pola penyelesaian sengketa para pelaku bisnis sekarang ini sudah ketergantungan dengan lembaga pengadilan. Sehingga penyelesaian sengketa melalui pengadilan menjadi zona nyaman mereka. Selain itu dalam praktek penyelesaian sengketa apabila pelaku bisnis mengkonsultasikan permasalahan mereka kepada para advokat tidak ada advokat yang menyarankan penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase.Kata Kunci : Pemberdayaan, Undang-Undang Arbitrase, dan Penyelesaian Sengketa Bisnis.
LEGAL DISCOVERY BY JUDGES IN ADDRESSING THE AMBIGUITY OF “DEALER” AND “USER” ELEMENTS IN ARTICLES 114, 112, AND 127 OF THE NARCOTICS LAW Irwan Triadi; Dhikma Heradika; Abelmart Sihombing; Bayu Giri Atmojo
Multidisciplinary Indonesian Center Journal (MICJO) Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Vol. 3 No. 1 Edisi Januari 2026
Publisher : PT. Jurnal Center Indonesia Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62567/micjo.v3i1.1638

Abstract

The ambiguity of the elements “dealer” and “user” in Articles 114, 112, and 127 of Law Number 35 of 2009 on Narcotics creates legal uncertainty in the practice of criminal justice. These three provisions often overlap in law enforcement, particularly when investigators and public prosecutors apply more severe charges without comprehensively examining the legal construction of the defendant’s actions, including the social and situational context behind them. This study is a normative legal research that examines the doctrine of judicial legal discovery, principles of criminal law, and the principle of proportionality in sentencing in a more in-depth and structured manner. The results of the study indicate that judges have the authority to interpret the elements of narcotics criminal acts systematically, grammatically, and teleologically to clearly distinguish between “abusive users” and “dealers with the intent to distribute.” Legal discovery is needed to prevent overcriminalization and to ensure the protection of the rights of suspects and defendants throughout the entire criminal justice process. This study concludes that the appropriate method of interpretation is an integration of systematic interpretation, teleological interpretation, and the ratio legis of the Narcotics Law.
THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGALITY IN THE DYNAMICS OF CRIMINAL LAW INTERPRETATION: A NORMATIVE STUDY ON THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY Irwan Triadi; Dhikma Heradika
Multidisciplinary Indonesian Center Journal (MICJO) Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Vol. 3 No. 1 Edisi Januari 2026
Publisher : PT. Jurnal Center Indonesia Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62567/micjo.v3i1.1654

Abstract

The principle of legality is a fundamental concept in the Indonesian criminal justice system, ensuring legal certainty and the protection of human rights from arbitrary criminal punishment. However, the rapid development of modern crimes often leads to legal gaps or vague norms that require judges to conduct judicial law-finding (rechtsvinding) when resolving criminal cases. This research aims to analyze the position of the principle of legality as a legal limit to judicial authority and examine how far judicial law-finding can be carried out without violating the essential principles of criminal law. This study employs a normative legal research method with a statute approach, conceptual approach, case approach, and historical approach. The results demonstrate that the principle of legality plays a crucial role in restricting judicial interpretation to prevent the creation of new offenses that may harm defendants and to ensure punishment can only be imposed based on pre-existing laws. Nonetheless, judicial law-finding remains necessary to address contemporary crimes that are not yet regulated under statutory law. Therefore, a proportional balance between legal certainty and substantive justice is required so that the principle of legality and judicial law-finding can work synergistically within Indonesia’s criminal justice system.
Co-Authors Abelmart Sihombing Adi Sulistiyono Bayu Giri Atmojo Irwan Triadi