Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

PROBLEMATIKA KEWENANGAN MENETAPKAN KERUGIAN KEUANGAN NEGARA DALAM PRAKTIK PERADILAN TINDAK PINDANA KORUPSI Sibuea, Hotma P.; Wijanarko, Dwi Seno; Efrianto, Gatot
Jurnal Hukum Sasana Vol. 6 No. 1 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Sasana
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/sasana.v6i1.263

Sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum, tindak pidana korupsi adalah tindak pidana yang mengakibatkan kerugian keuangan negara. Menurut Pasal 10 Undang-undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2006, wewenang menetapkan kerugian keuangan negara akibat perbuatan melawan hukum seperti tindak pidana korupsi adalah wewenang Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. Namun, dalam praktik, instansi yang diminta penyidik untuk menetapkan kerugian keuangan negara dalam tindak pidana korupsi adalah Badan Pengawas Keuangan dan Pembangunan (BPKP). Tindakan tersebut adalah tindakan yang bertentangan dengan undang-undang.Dalam hubungan dengan tindakan tersebut, masalah hukum yang hendak diteliti ada 2 (dua) yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, apakah tindakan BPKP menetapkan kerugian keuangan negara dalam tindak pidana korupsi sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum dapat dikategorikan tindakan sewenang-wenang? Kedua, apakah tindakan BPKP menetapkan jumlah kerugian keuangan negara dalam tindak pidana korupsi sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum dapat dikategorikan sebagai pelanggaran sendi-sendi hukum konstitusional pemisahan kekuasaan? Metode penelitian yang dipakai dalam penelitian adalah yuridis-normatif.Sebagai hasil penelitian, ada 2 (dua) simpulan yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, tindakan BPKP yang dimaksud di atas adalah tindakan sewenang-wenang. Kedua, tindakan sewenang-wenang BPKP tersebut termasuk pelanggaran sendi hukum pemisahan kekuasaan. Ada 2 (dua) saran yang dikemukakan yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, Undang-undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 juncto UU Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 dan undang-undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2006 perlu diamandemen. Kedua, dalam kedua undang-undang tersebut perlu ditambahkan ayat atau pasal yang mengatur sebagai berikut â€œPenetapkan kerugian keuangan negara yang dilakukan badan atau organ selain Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan adalah tidak sah atau batal demi hukum.â€

DASAR HUKUM DAN KEDUDUKAN SERTA TUGAS MAUPUN WEWENANG KOMISI KEJAKSAAN DALAM BINGKAI SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA SEBAGAI NEGARA HUKUM Sibuea, Hotma P.; Putri, Elfirda Ade
Jurnal Hukum Sasana Vol. 6 No. 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Sasana
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/sasana.v6i2.384

Komisi Kejaksaan adalah organ negara penunjang yang dibentuk berdasarkan Perpres Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 untuk mengawasi pelaksanaan tugas dan kinerja jaksa dan pegawai kejaksaan. Namun, dalam praktik, Komisi Kejaksaan mengalami hambatan dan kendala yang bersumber justru dari regulasi yang mengatur Komisi Kejaksaan.Masalah penelitian yang dapat ditetapkan adalah sebagai berikut. Pertama, apakah dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan berdasarkan Peraturan Presiden Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 dapat mendorong peningkatan kualitas kinerja jaksa dan pegawai Kejaksaan seperti dikehendaki Pasal 38 Undang-undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 tentang Kejaksaan? Kedua, apakah dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan perlu diubah supaya dapat mendorong kualitas kinerja Kejaksaan sesuai dengan amanat Pasal 38 UU Nomor 16 Tahun 2004? Metode penelitian yang dipergunakan adalah metode penelitian yuridis-normatif. Ada 2 (dua) simpulan yang dikemukakan yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan berdasarkan Peraturan Presiden Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 tidak dapat mendorong peningkatan kinerja jaksa dan pegawai Kejaksaan seperti dikehendaki Pasal 38 UU Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 tentang Kejaksaan. Kedua, dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan perlu diubah supaya organ negara penunjang tersebut dapat mendorong peningkatan kualitas kinerja Kejaksaan sesuai dengan amanat Pasal 38 UU Nomor 16 Tahun 2004. Dalam hubungan dengan kedua simpulan tersebut, saran-saran yang dapat dikemukakan adalah sebagai berikut. Pertama, Penpres Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 harus segera diamandemen berkenaan dengan dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan dan pasal yang menghambat pelaksanaan tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan. Kedua, dasar hukum Komisi Kejaksaan perlu ditingkatkan menjadi undang-undang dan kedudukannya menjadi organ negara penunjang otonom (mandiri) yang disertai dengan wewenang yang bersifat menentukan hasil pelaksanaan tugasnya sebagai lembaga pengawas eksternal.

Comparison of the Indonesian and South Korea Impeachment System as a Method of Power Limitation Sibuea, Hotma P.
Budapest International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI-Journal): Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 4, No 4 (2021): Budapest International Research and Critics Institute November
Publisher : Budapest International Research and Critics University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33258/birci.v4i4.3308

Abuse of power is a classic universal phenomenon since the time of Ancient Greece. Humanity has developed various methods of controlling and limiting power systems since ancient times. Each country forms and develops methods and systems for limiting (supervising) power with various characteristics according to the needs, aims, objectives, value systems, philosophy, history, and natural environment of each nation. Several systems of control and limitation of power have been developed by mankind, such as the theory of separation of powers, the theory of checks and balances, the judicial review system, and others. All systems and methods of limiting and supervising power are aimed at preventing abuse of authority that results in violations of human rights and the rights of citizens. One of the systems of control and limitation of power developed by mankind is impeachment. The system and methods of impeachment are well known in various systems of government. Impeachment is a method of limiting the power of public officials. With impeachment, public officials can be dismissed during their term of office. In this paper, the impeachment methods and systems that are discussed and compared are the Indonesian impeachment model with a presidential system and South Korea's impeachment model with a parliamentary system. The legal issues (issues) under study relate to the similarities and differences in the methods and systems of impeachment in the two countries. The research method used is the juridical-normative research method. In a conclusion, the research is the Indonesian and South Korean impeachment systems and methods have significant similarities and differences within the framework of different government systems. Amendments to the 1945 Constitution need to be made as a change to a better method and system of impeachment.

Synchronization of Laws and Regulations Promulgated in the Indonesian Law Country according to the Principles of Establishing Legislation Muhapilah, Siti Opih; Sibuea, Hotma P.; Tumanggor, M. S.; Widijowati, Rr. Dijan
International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Vol. 1 No. 4 (2023): International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary (January - March 2023)
Publisher : Green Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38035/ijam.v1i4.125

The stages of forming laws and regulations are mentioned in Article 1 paragraph (1) of Law Number 12 of 2011 which starts from planning, preparation, preparation techniques, formulation, discussion, approval, promulgation, and dissemination. Among the series of processes above, there is a process that is not explicitly stated but has a very important role, namely the process of harmonization. The research method used in this study is a normative juridical research method through literature study which examines primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. The formulation of Article 1 point 1 of Law Number 12 of 2011 needs to be amended and added a new article formulation regarding the harmonization process at the stage of forming statutory regulations promulgated in state news. Second, the formulation of the new article which regulates the mechanism and procedures for the process of harmonization in the formation of statutory regulations promulgated in the state gazette reads as follows "...Harmonization, unification and consolidation of the conception of the Draft Regulation promulgated in the state gazette is carried out starting at the planning stage , preparation, and discussion coordinated by the institution that organizes government affairs in the field of forming statutory regulations."

PROBLEMATIKA KEWENANGAN MENETAPKAN KERUGIAN KEUANGAN NEGARA DALAM PRAKTIK PERADILAN TINDAK PINDANA KORUPSI Sibuea, Hotma P.; Wijanarko, Dwi Seno; Efrianto, Gatot
Jurnal Hukum Sasana Vol. 6 No. 1 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Sasana: June 2020
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/sasana.v6i1.263

Sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum, tindak pidana korupsi adalah tindak pidana yang mengakibatkan kerugian keuangan negara. Menurut Pasal 10 Undang-undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2006, wewenang menetapkan kerugian keuangan negara akibat perbuatan melawan hukum seperti tindak pidana korupsi adalah wewenang Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan. Namun, dalam praktik, instansi yang diminta penyidik untuk menetapkan kerugian keuangan negara dalam tindak pidana korupsi adalah Badan Pengawas Keuangan dan Pembangunan (BPKP). Tindakan tersebut adalah tindakan yang bertentangan dengan undang-undang.Dalam hubungan dengan tindakan tersebut, masalah hukum yang hendak diteliti ada 2 (dua) yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, apakah tindakan BPKP menetapkan kerugian keuangan negara dalam tindak pidana korupsi sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum dapat dikategorikan tindakan sewenang-wenang? Kedua, apakah tindakan BPKP menetapkan jumlah kerugian keuangan negara dalam tindak pidana korupsi sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum dapat dikategorikan sebagai pelanggaran sendi-sendi hukum konstitusional pemisahan kekuasaan? Metode penelitian yang dipakai dalam penelitian adalah yuridis-normatif.Sebagai hasil penelitian, ada 2 (dua) simpulan yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, tindakan BPKP yang dimaksud di atas adalah tindakan sewenang-wenang. Kedua, tindakan sewenang-wenang BPKP tersebut termasuk pelanggaran sendi hukum pemisahan kekuasaan. Ada 2 (dua) saran yang dikemukakan yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, Undang-undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 juncto UU Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 dan undang-undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2006 perlu diamandemen. Kedua, dalam kedua undang-undang tersebut perlu ditambahkan ayat atau pasal yang mengatur sebagai berikut “Penetapkan kerugian keuangan negara yang dilakukan badan atau organ selain Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan adalah tidak sah atau batal demi hukum.”

DASAR HUKUM DAN KEDUDUKAN SERTA TUGAS MAUPUN WEWENANG KOMISI KEJAKSAAN DALAM BINGKAI SISTEM KETATANEGARAAN INDONESIA SEBAGAI NEGARA HUKUM Sibuea, Hotma P.; Putri, Elfirda Ade
Jurnal Hukum Sasana Vol. 6 No. 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Sasana: December 2020
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/sasana.v6i2.384

Komisi Kejaksaan adalah organ negara penunjang yang dibentuk berdasarkan Perpres Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 untuk mengawasi pelaksanaan tugas dan kinerja jaksa dan pegawai kejaksaan. Namun, dalam praktik, Komisi Kejaksaan mengalami hambatan dan kendala yang bersumber justru dari regulasi yang mengatur Komisi Kejaksaan.Masalah penelitian yang dapat ditetapkan adalah sebagai berikut. Pertama, apakah dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan berdasarkan Peraturan Presiden Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 dapat mendorong peningkatan kualitas kinerja jaksa dan pegawai Kejaksaan seperti dikehendaki Pasal 38 Undang-undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 tentang Kejaksaan? Kedua, apakah dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan perlu diubah supaya dapat mendorong kualitas kinerja Kejaksaan sesuai dengan amanat Pasal 38 UU Nomor 16 Tahun 2004? Metode penelitian yang dipergunakan adalah metode penelitian yuridis-normatif. Ada 2 (dua) simpulan yang dikemukakan yakni sebagai berikut. Pertama, dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan berdasarkan Peraturan Presiden Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 tidak dapat mendorong peningkatan kinerja jaksa dan pegawai Kejaksaan seperti dikehendaki Pasal 38 UU Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 tentang Kejaksaan. Kedua, dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan perlu diubah supaya organ negara penunjang tersebut dapat mendorong peningkatan kualitas kinerja Kejaksaan sesuai dengan amanat Pasal 38 UU Nomor 16 Tahun 2004. Dalam hubungan dengan kedua simpulan tersebut, saran-saran yang dapat dikemukakan adalah sebagai berikut. Pertama, Penpres Nomor 18 Tahun 2011 harus segera diamandemen berkenaan dengan dasar hukum, kedudukan, tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan dan pasal yang menghambat pelaksanaan tugas dan wewenang Komisi Kejaksaan. Kedua, dasar hukum Komisi Kejaksaan perlu ditingkatkan menjadi undang-undang dan kedudukannya menjadi organ negara penunjang otonom (mandiri) yang disertai dengan wewenang yang bersifat menentukan hasil pelaksanaan tugasnya sebagai lembaga pengawas eksternal.

Kedudukan Kepala Desa Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 Jo Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 Tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pindana Korupsi Syahban; Hotma P. Sibuea; Ika Dewi Sartika Saimima
Jurnal Hukum Sasana Vol. 7 No. 2 (2021): Jurnal Hukum Sasana: December 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/sasana.v7i2.1236

The position of the Village Head as a legal subject in law number 31 of 199 in conjunction with law number 20 of 2001 regarding corruption is not found. In this law, the legal subjects regulated in Article 1 include corporations, state administrators, civil servants and individuals. The legal vacuum in the criminal act of corruption is certainly a problem, if the village head collides with Articles 5, 11, 12 and 12 B. The problem in this research is about; Village heads have legal status as civil servants or state administrators. The ideal legal status of the Village Head in the context of the corruption law? The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the village head could be categorized as a civil servant or state administrator as referred to in law number 31 of 1999 jo law number 20 of 2001 concerning the eradication of corruption. Second, to find out the ideal legal status of the village head in law number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with law number 20 of 2001 concerning the eradication of corruption. The research method used in this research is the normative juridical research method. This study shows the following results. First, the position of the Village Head cannot be categorized as having the legal status of a Civil Servant or State Administrator as referred to in law number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with law number 20 of 2001 concerning the eradication of criminal acts of corruption. Second, the ideal legal status of the village head in relation to law number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with law number 20 of 2001 concerning the eradication of corruption is as state administrator. Suggestions that can be conveyed are as follows. First, law number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with law number 20 of 2001 concerning the eradication of corruption does not explain the legal position of the village head, whether as a civil servant or state administrator. So, to reinforce the legal position of the village head, revisions or changes need to be made. Second, in the revision or amendment of law number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with law number 20 of 2001 concerning the eradication of corruption, it is necessary to add or insert one paragraph regulating the legal status of the village head, namely as state administrator.

Penyanderaan (Gijzeling) Sebagai Upaya Penagihan Pajak Dengan Surat Paksa Menurut Peraturan Perundang-undangan Budi Budaya; Hotma P. Sibuea; Noviriska
Jurnal Hukum Sasana Vol. 9 No. 1 (2023): Jurnal Hukum Sasana: June 2023
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/sasana.v9i1.1353

This research discusses the delegation of authority to grant hostage-taking permission (gijzeling) from the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia to the Director General of Taxes as seen from the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 30 of 2014 on State Administration. This study aims to determine whether granting a hostage-taking permit (gijzeling) can be delegated from the Minister of Finance to the Director General of Taxes. The research method used is the juridical-normative method, namely research that emphasizes the science of law and conducts an inventory of positive law relating to implementing laws and regulations. From this research, it was found that the granting of hostage warrant permits from the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia can be delegated to the Director General of Taxes. The method of delegation of authority is by the delegation of authority.

Kedudukan Hukum Tenaga Medis dan Tenaga Kesehatan Perawat Sebagai Pemangku Profesi Kesehatan Dalam Pelayanan Kesehatan Hotma P. Sibuea; Dwi Seno Wijanarko; Ali Johardi Wirogioto; Erwin Syahruddin; Katrina Siagian
KRTHA BHAYANGKARA Vol. 17 No. 3 (2023): KRTHA BHAYANGKARA: DECEMBER 2023
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/krtha.v17i3.789

Health professions recognized autonomously by law consist of (1) the medical profession, (2) nursing, and (3) midwifery. These three health professions have different legal principles, so both types of professions have professional autonomy. The professional autonomy of health professions has consequences for various aspects of the existence of health profession stakeholders, such as their position, function, tasks, authority, and legal responsibilities. One of the legal aspects of health profession stakeholders is the legal standing of each health profession stakeholder. The law does not regulate the legal standing of health profession stakeholders in healthcare services, resulting in a legal vacuum regarding the legal standing of these health profession stakeholders. Do health profession stakeholders have equal or different legal standing in healthcare services from the perspective of the principle of legal equality? The research method used is the juridical-normative research method, which examines primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The research conclusion is that the legal standing of health profession stakeholders is the same and equal from the perspective of the principle of legal equality. The suggestion presented is that legislators need to amend healthcare laws, medical practice laws, nursing laws, and midwifery laws to regulate and establish the legal standing of health profession stakeholders as the same and equal based on the principle of legal equality.

Paradigma Kedaulatan Pangan Sebagai Landasan Penanggulangan Krisis Pangan Global Dalam Perspektif Negara Hukum Kesejahteraan Hotma P. Sibuea; Indra Lorenly Nainggolan; Jantarda Mauli Hutagalung
KRTHA BHAYANGKARA Vol. 16 No. 2 (2022): KRTHA BHAYANGKARA: DECEMBER 2022
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/krtha.v16i2.1220

The Indonesian Constitution stipulates in Article 28H paragraph (1) as follows: “everyone has the right to live in physical and spiritual prosperity, to live and to have a good and healthy environment, and to have the right to health services”. The principle of a prosperous life as the right of every person is further regulated in Article 9 paragraph (2) of Law Number 39 of 1999 which stipulates as follows ” everyone has the right to live in peaceful, safe, peace, happy, physical and spiritual prosperity. One aspect of supporting a prosperous life is food. Food is one of the basic human needs that must be met in order to live a prosperous life. The Indonesian state and nation really understand the urgency of food in human life so that they can live in prosperity. Based on the idea of the urgency of food in a prosperous human life, Indonesia stipulates Law No. 18 of 2002 on Food. The Indonesian state is determined to achieve the ideals of "food sovereignty" as an ideal condition that is expected to support the welfare of the Indonesian nation. The Indonesian people are determined to be sovereign in the food sector in the sense of having the ability to determine food policies that guarantee the right to food so that the Indonesian people can live in prosperity. However, in reality, the world is experiencing a food crisis at this time. The reality of the food crisis that is hitting the world at this time is one of the agendas promoted by President Joko Widodo, who serves as the G-20 Presidency, as one of the main agendas of the G-20 meeting in the months ahead. Can President Joko Widodo as the G-20 Presidency garner the agreement of G-20 countries to cooperate and work together to overcome the world food crisis as one of the main agendas of the G-20 meeting? This research uses juridical-normative research methods and other research methods that are deemed necessary and can support the success of the research. According to the author, as the G-20 Presidency, President Joko Widodo will be able to forge an agreement with G-20 member countries to work together and work together to overcome the world food crisis that is happening at this time. The reason is that all G-20 member countries and all countries in the world will be affected by the global food crisis in due time, so if they do not want to be affected by the global food crisis, all G-20 member countries and the other countries on the surface of the earth must work together to tackle the global food crisis. All G-20 member countries are advised to take concrete steps to overcome the food crisis in their respective countries as has been done by Indonesia as stated in President Joko Widodo's program.

Title

Found 16 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 16 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 16 Documents
Search