Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
6.35
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Proceedings of Annual International Conference Syiah Kuala University - Social Sciences Chapter USU LAW JOURNAL TRANSPARENCY Journal of International Law Abdimas Talenta : Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND SOCIAL RESEARCH JURNAL MERCATORIA Journal of Education, Humaniora and Social Sciences (JEHSS) Jurnal Ilmiah Penegakan Hukum Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum ADIL : Jurnal Hukum NOMOI Law Review Locus Journal of Academic Literature Review Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik (JIHHP) Jurnal Sistem Informasi Mahakarya (JSIM) Realita: Jurnal Penelitian dan Kebudayaan Islam Jurnal Pencerah Bangsa AML/CFT Journal The Journal of Anti Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Al-Bayyinah Causa: Jurnal Hukum dan Kewarganegaraan Acta Law Journal Jurnal Intelek Dan Cendikiawan Nusantara Jurnal Intelek Insan Cendikia Neoclassical Legal Review: Journal of Law and Contemporary Issues ULJLS
NINGRUM NATASYA SIRAIT
Fakultas Hukum, Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum, Universitas Sumatera Utara
Religion Aerospace Engineering Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Astronomy Automotive Engineering Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology Chemical Engineering, Chemistry & Bioengineering Chemistry Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Control & Systems Engineering Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Dentistry Earth & Planetary Sciences Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Electrical & Electronics Engineering Energy Engineering Environmental Science Health Professions Immunology & microbiology Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Materials Science & Nanotechnology Mathematics Mechanical Engineering Medicine & Pharmacology Neuroscience Nursing Physics Public Health Social Sciences Transportation Veterinary Other

Published : 67 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 67 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4   5 
ASAS KEPATUTAN DALAM PEMBERIAN GANTI RUGI DAN KOMPENSASI OLEH PT. PERUSAHAAN LISTRIK NEGARA (PERSERO) ATAS TANAH MASYARAKAT (Studi pada Pembangunan Jaringan Kabel Saluran Udara Tegangan Ekstra Tinggi (SUTET) di Kabupaten Langkat dan Kota Binjai) Marasamin Ritonga; Ningrum Natasya Sirait; Tan Kamello; Mahmul Siregar
USU LAW JOURNAL Vol 4, No 2 (2016)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (600.89 KB)

Abstract

Based on the legal handling on the compensation for the people who were harmed by the construction of SUTET Cable Network which was resulted in the agreement by both parties (PT. PLN (Persero) and the people), followed by the opinion of the District Attorney, it could be concluded that: The principle of compatibility played an important role in determining the achievement and the application of justice and certainty as the responsibility of the stakeholders for their performance and willingness to comply with their agreement. The process of the principle of compatibility through the agreement by reconciliation as the realization of the living custom with transparency and consanguinity could set aside the policy of the Decree of the Minister of Mining and Energy No. 975 K/47/MPE/1999. In maximizing its function and responsibility, PT. PLN (Persero) should admit that economic development is more advanced than the written record. In order not to be long-winded in the concept of compensation, it is necessary to be brave enough in internal improvement in prioritizing the need for justice and the need for legal certainty so that the goal is more prioritized than the procedure in taking the responsibility   Keywords: Principle of Compatibility, Compensation, Justice
KEDUDUKAN DAN KEKUATAN MENGIKAT DARI NOTA KESEPAHAMAN (MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING) DALAM PERSPEKTIF HUKUM KONTRAK DI INDONESIA Fernando Z. Tampubolon; Ningrum Natasya Sirait; Runtung Sitepu; Mahmul Siregar
USU LAW JOURNAL Vol 4, No 3 (2016)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (554.962 KB)

Abstract

ABSTRACT Practically, Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is commonly used by stakeholders, with various reasons, to do business transaction or inter-institutional relationship. As an agreement which is placed in pre-contract and preliminary contract, it is usually misinterpreted as a part of a contract in Indonesia so that it usually causes problems for stakeholders when it ends in legal dispute among the stakeholders. Therefore, it is necessary to do judicial normative analysis on the real position and binding force of Memorandum of Understanding, viewed from contract law in Indonesia. In this case, descriptive analytic method inductively and logically was used in primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials in order to obtain clear description of meaning and principles found in the Memorandum of Understanding. The result of the analysis on court’s consideration and verdicts shows that Memorandum of Understanding tends to be described as a contract according to the principles and provisions in the Civil Code so that the consideration deviates from the meaning of Memorandum of Understanding; that is, initial agreement is designed by the absence of legal consequence. In other words, Memorandum of Understanding is an agreement which comes from the stakeholders before everything is started seriously through a more and complex agreement in order to avoid damages of those who are involved in the agreement. When the contract is final and conclusive, Memorandum of Understanding can be equivalent with the principles and provisions under Article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code and, at the same time, Memorandum of Understanding has its substantial principles and becomes just a name. Keywords: Position, Binding Force, Memorandum of Understanding, Contract
PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP DEBITUR (PELAKSANA PEKERJAAN) DALAM PELAKSANAAN PERJANJIAN UPAH BORONG (PARTISIPATIF) DALAM PROYEK SWAKELOLA DI LINGKUNGAN PEKERJAAN UMUM KABUPATEN DELI SERDANG Taufik Hasudungan Sihotang; Ningrum Natasya Sirait; Tan Kamello; Mahmul Siregar
USU LAW JOURNAL Vol 5, No 1 (2017)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (511.892 KB)

Abstract

ABSTRACT Government procurement of goods and service is a very essential part in the process of implementing the development. Without adequate equipment and infrastructure, the implementation of government’s work will be disturbed and it will not achieve the maximum results. In order to achieve such results, comprehensible legal regulations are required, especially regarding rights and obligations of parties that execute the work. It is closely related to the agreement made in the implementation of contracted works as stipulated in Article 1601 b of the Civil Code. According to the agreement, the work results can be accounted for in terms of its physic, finance, and usefulness for the uninterrupted flow of government work and service. The thesis discusses some problems, namely how the protection for debtor (work executor) is in the agreement to the contracted work wages (participating) in self management project at the public works of Deli Serdang Regency and how the protection for debtor (work executor) is in the implementation of the agreement to the contracted work wages (participating) in the self management project at the public works of Deli Serdang Regency. The thesis uses analytical prescriptive judicial normative research method. It used the theory of Legal Protection. The data were gathered by using primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, supported by approach methods, namely statute approach, conceptual approach and case approach. The gathered data were analyzed qualityatively.  The results showed that: First, in the agreement to the contracted work wages between the debtor (private party/contractor) and the creditor (government /employer), the debtor had weaker position compared to the creditor. The debtor is vulnerable to endure loss that was uncertainly paid by the creditor. Secondly, the agreement to the contracted work wages did not reflect balance principle in which the debtor bear their own obligations, for which in this research the debtor took legal action to obtain legal protection, so that the agreement world reflect the balance principle.   Keywords: Legal Protection, Debtor (Work Executor), Self Management
TANGGUNG JAWAB DIREKSI ATAS LAPORAN KEUANGAN PERUSAHAAN PUBLIK Rumata Rosininta Sianya; Bismar Nasution; Ningrum Natasya Sirait; Sunarmi Sunarmi
USU LAW JOURNAL Vol 6, No 2 (2018)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (578.332 KB)

Abstract

ABSTRACT One of the organs of a company is Board of Directors that are fully responsible for the management, interest, and goals of a company and representing the company either in or outside of court of law (persona standi in judicio). Public company with applies the principle of transparency requiring the Board of Directors to periodically provide a financial report to Badan Pengawas Pasar Modal (Bapepam) as regulated in the Regulation of Bapepam No. VIII.G.7. Board of Directors of Public Company are required to issue a Letter of Responsibility of Board of Directors for the Financial Report signed by President Director and Financial Director. If an information /material fact inflicting loss to the third party is found in the financial report, according to Law on Limited Liability Company and the Regulation of Bapepam No. VIII.G.7, the Board of Directors of Public Company is jointly and severally reponsible for the injured parties. Therefore, the writer is interested in doing a study entitled “The Responsibility of Board of Directors for the Financial report of Public Company”. The criteria determining whether or not the Board of Directors made an offense in terms of signing a statement stating the responsibility of Board of Directors for the financial report inflicting loss to the party outside of the company can be seen from the substance of the financial report whether or not it was made under good faith and full of responsibility for the proper purpose of the company, whether or not the Board of Directors had applied the standard of care that they were avoided from negligence that can inflicting loss to other parties, whether or not the Board of Directors had been beyond their authority, not only to what is prohibited in the statutes of the company but also to the existing regulations or public order (ultra vires), and whether or not the Board of Directors made their business decision based on rational basis. The form of the responsibility of the Board of Directors for the financial report according to the Law on Limited Liability Company and the Regulation of Bapepam No. VIII.G.7 in the case of incorrect or misleading information/material fact inflicting loss to other parties was a joint responsibility off all members of the Board of Directors of the public company because whether or not the substance of the letter of statement of the Board of Directors related to the financial report was correct, was binding and become juridical responsibility of all members of the Board of Directors of public company, considering that President Director and Financial Director signing the financial report acted for and on behalf of the company as long as the principles of duty of care, good faith and rational basis in drafting and preparing the financial report were applied by the President Director and Financial Director, all of the members of the Board of Directors are required to have a joint responsibility for the loss inflicted to the third party. Keywords: Responsibility, Financial Report, Public Company
Analisis Hukum Terhadap Restrukturisasi Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN) Sektor Minyak Dan Bumi Putri Ayu Pratiwi; Ningrum Natasya Sirait; Mahmul Siregar; Jelly Leviza
USU LAW JOURNAL Vol 7, No 4 (2019)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (714.067 KB)

Abstract

Abstract. The state established a SOE to seek natural wealth for the people's welfare. There are two Sector SOE of Oil and Gas namely PT Pertamina and PT PGN. In an effort to boost the performance of SOE, the Government has restructured the synergy of similar BUMN. The Government established Oil and Gas SOE Holding through Government regulation number 6 of 2018 concerning Addition of capital participation into PT Pertamina share capital. Through the Government Regulation, making Pertamina as the parent company of SOE oil and gas, PGN as a subsidiary and resulting in the status of the PT PGN Tbk Company (Persero) changing into a limited liability company that fully complies with the limited company Law, PGN is no longer a BUMN. Government regulation number 6 of 2018 as the legal basis for the establishment of the Oil and Gas Holding raises a mismatch of the legal rules between the Company Law and the BUMN Law and the State Finance Law, the State Treasury Law and the Oil and Gas Law which results in legal uncertainty. The absence of legislation governing state-owned holding increasingly makes it unclear in managing BUMN. The transfer of State shares to PGN to Pertamina resulted in PGN being subject to the Company Law. However, in the explanation of Government Regulation Number 72 of 2016, that a subsidiary in this case PGN is equated with a BUMN. Therefore, the provisions of Government Regulation Number 72 of 2016 and Government Regulation Number 6 of 2018 are only to legalize the establishment of Oil and Gas SOE Holding but do not make it absolutely a Limited Liability Company.   Keywords: restructuritation, state own company, oil and gas
Analisis Hukum Penolakan Aksesi Framework Convention On Tobacco Control (FCTC) Terhadap Industri Hasil Tembakau di Indonesia Cahya Wijaya; Ningrum Natasya Sirait; Mahmul Siregar; Sutiarnoto Sutiarnoto
USU LAW JOURNAL Vol 7, No 4 (2019)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (946.518 KB)

Abstract

Abstract. The tobacco industry becomes a controversial industry. In one side, it have very big role for the national economy, in other hand it has a negative impact on health and environment. To carry out tobacco control efforts WHO issued FCTC. Although  Indonesia is one of the members (drafting committee) in initiating FCTC. However, Indonesia is the only country in the Asia Pacific region that did not signed the FCTC agreement. Therefore, the problem arises, namely how the international movement anti-tobacco campaign was carried out by the FCTC initiator, how is the rejection on the FCTC's accession by Indonesia government, how is the harmonization between legislation regarding tobacco control with the provisions of the FCTC although Indonesia not ratify the FCTC. Based on the results of the study it can be concluded that the anti-tobacco campaign movement was initiated by the FCA, the Bloomberg Initiative, non-governmental organizations and civil society. The international regime approach is used to replace the nicotine consumption pattern with NRT. Rejection of FCTC accession by the Indonesian government due to an interests. One of the interests are interests of state revenue. Although Indonesia did not ratify the FCTC, the Indonesian government adopted and harmonized laws and regulations with the provisions of the FCTC through various regulations including the regulation of advertising, promotion and sponsorship through Law Number 32 of 2002 concerning Broadcasting, Labeling and packaging through minister of health regulation Number 56 of 2017 concerning the pictorial health warning. In addition, the government has formulated a tobacco control roadmap.   Keywords: accession, tobacco, industry, FCTC
GUGATAN CLASS ACTION SEBAGAI IMPLIKASI DARI PENEGAKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 5 TAHUN 1999 TENTANG LARANGAN PRAKTEK MONOPOLI DAN PERSAINGAN USAHA TIDAK SEHAT ESRA STEPHANI; NINGRUM NATASYA SIRAIT; WINDHA WINDHA
TRANSPARENCY Vol 2, No 1 (2013)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (272.205 KB)

Abstract

Enforcement developments Law No. 5 of 1999 which interesting now is the birth of KPPU decision contains consumers loss, so that implicates consumer protection, look at the class action lawsuits in some regions in Indonesia, example KPPU Decision No. 07/KPPU-L/2007 and KPPU Decision No. 03/KPPU-L/2008. The issues to be examined in this research is about rule of class action lawsuit in the laws and regulations in Indonesia, the enforcement of Law No. 5 of 1999 and the decisions of KPPU which may have implications for class action lawsuits. Writing method used to compile this paper is the normative legal research or library research, by collecting material from books, magazines, papers, internet, legislation and other scholarly writings which closely related with the intent and purpose of the preparation of this paper. The results of this paper it can be concluded that, the KPPU decision could have implications for class action if there is an element consumer loss listed in the consideration and decision of KPPU as the initial evidence of consumer loss. Suggestions for this research is that we need to make a law about the class action as enforcement implications Law No. 5 of 1999. Kata Kunci : Implikasi, Putusan KPPU, gugatan class action
PENGECUALIAN PRAKTEK MONOPOLI YANG DILAKUKAN OLEH BUMN SESUAI PASAL 51 UU NO.5 TAHUN 1999 MARSHIAS MEREAPUL GINTING; NINGRUM NATASYA SIRAIT; WINDHA WINDHA
TRANSPARENCY Vol 2, No 2 (2013)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

After the entry into force of Law no. 5 of 1999, the monopolistic practices in the Indonesian economic activity expressly prohibited by law, but there are exceptions to the state, which in the presence of Law No.5 of 1999 clause 51, have legal legitimacy to claim exemption in monopolistic practices in Indonesia. Which are expected to given to state-owned monopoly, it can help the implementation of the 1945 Constitution Clause 33 of the Indonesian economy. Issues raised in this paper are as follows: how the regulation of monopolies in the legislation in Indonesia, how the position of BUMN in the economy in Indonesia as businesses that are entitled to monopolistic practices in Indonesia economy and how the exemption against monopolistic practices by BUMN. This research was conducted with the juridical-normative, remember to be studied is the provision of an article and its application in practice. Data obtained from examining the legislation and literature associated with the formulation of the problem. Monopoly by the state under the provisions of Clause 51 of Law 5 of 1999 is that monopoly or concentration of activity that can be done only over the branches of production that dominate the lives of many people and that is important for the country. Because until now there is no certainty in legislation which imposes limits is "dominate the life of the people" and "important for the country", it is entirely left to the House of Representatives to decide. Monopoly and or concentration of activity should be regulated by law and held by the State-Owned Enterprises and or body or institution established or designated by the Government. In this paper will be given an example of a state agency that have a right to  monopoly, namely PT PLN (Persero), which held a monopoly supply of electricity by the legitimacy of law no. 30 of 1999. Keywords : BUMN, Pengecualian Monopoli
ANALISIS YURIDIS AKUISISI YANG DAPAT MENYEBABKAN PRAKTIK MONOPOLI DAN PERSAINGAN USAHA TIDAK SEHAT BERDASARKAN KAJIAN PUTUSAN KPPU NO. 06/KPPU-M/2017 Agustina Pasaribu; Ningrum Natasya; Mahmul Siregar
TRANSPARENCY Vol 2, No 1 (2019)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (300.461 KB)

Abstract

Akuisisi merupakan suatu langkah restrukturisasi perusahaan yang mampu mendatangkan keuntungan dalam waktu yang relatif singkat dan meningkatkan valuasi suatu perusahaan dengan cara mengambil alih kepemilikan saham badan usaha atau perseroan. Namun dalam penerapannya, akuisisi dapat diindikasikan melanggar UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat karena berpotensi mengurangi persaingan dalam pasar bersangkutan. Oleh karena itu, mekanisme pemberitahuan (notification) menjadi langkah yang tepat bagi KPPU untuk mengawasi dan menilai setiap aksi akuisisi atas indikasi praktik monopoli dan persaingan usaha tidak sehat sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ketentuan Pasal 29 UU No. 5 Tahun 1999. Pemberitahuan ini sifatnya wajib dan dilakukan sejak tanggal pengambilalihan (akuisisi) dilakukan. Namun pemberitahuan ini dinilai kurang efektif dalam mencegah praktik monopoli dan persaingan usaha tidak sehat serta menimbulkan kerugian bagi pelaku usaha yang telah melakukan akuisisi. Pengenaan sanksi atas keterlambatan pemberitahuan juga tidak memiliki dasar hukum yang kuat sehingga jumlah denda yang ditetapkan dalam setiap putusan KPPU menjadi hal yang dipertanyakan. Permasalahan tersebut menjadi dasar untuk menganalisis Putusan KPPU No. 06/KPPU-M/2017 tentang keterlambatan pemberitahuan akuisisi saham yang dilakukan oleh PT Japfa Comfeed Indonesia Tbk. Walaupun tidak ditemukan indikasi praktik monopoli dan persaingan usaha tidak sehat, denda keterlambatan pemberitahuan akuisisi yang diputuskan KPPU dinilai tidak memiliki dasar hukum yang kuat dan tidak sebanding dengan nilai transaksi akuisisi yang dilakukan. Sehingga Japfa melakukan upaya hukum keberatan atas putusan tersebut. Putusan Pengadilan Negeri menolak keberatan yang diajukan Japfa, tapi juga memperbaiki putusan KPPU dengan mengurangi jumlah denda. Metode yang digunakan dalam penulisan skripsi ini adalah yuridis normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum dengan cara meneliti data sekunder yang mempunyai relevansi dalam penulisan skripsi ini. Data sekunder yang dimaksud bersumber dari peraturan-peraturan maupun literatur-literatur yang diperoleh melalui bahan-bahan kepustakaan (Librabry Research) dengan analisis data kualitatif.   Kata Kunci : Akuisisi, Monopoli, Pemberitahuan, Japfa, Denda
KETERLAMBATAN KOPERASI SIMPAN PINJAM JASA MELAKUKAN NOTIFIKASI DALAM AKUISISI PERSROAN TERBATAS (STUDI PUTUSAN KPPU NOMOR: 02/KPPU-M/2018) Shania Meilisa; Ningrum Natasya; Mahmul Siregar
TRANSPARENCY Vol 1, No 01 (2020)
Publisher : Universitas Sumatera Utara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Akuisisi saham merupakan perbuatan hukum yang dilakukan orang perorang atau badan hukum untuk mengambilalih saham perseroan lain. Tindakan akuisisi biasa dilakukan untuk mengembangkan usaha selain dengan cara merger dan konsolidasi. Tetapi disisi lain, akuisisi saham merupakan kegiatan yang dilarang dalam UU No.5/1999 yang dapat mengakibatkan terjadinya hambatan terhadap persaingan usaha dan terjadinya praktek monopoli. Pasal 29 UU No. 5/1999 menetapkan bahwa yang dalam hal ini akuisisi saham yang mengakibatkan nilai aset dan/atau penjualan melebihi jumlah tertentu harus melakukan pemberitahuan pasca akuisisi setelah berlaku efektif secara yuridis. Penulisan skripsi ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yang bersifat deksriptif yaitu penelitian yang menelaah hukum persaingan usaha mengenai akuisisi saham. Pengumpulan bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tersier dilakukan dengan studi pustaka (library research) dan dianalisis dengan metode kualitatif. Skripsi ini membahas bagaimana pengaturan hukum persaingan usaha berkenaan dengan pemberitahuan akuisisi yang dilakukan Koperasi Simpan Pinjam JASA terhadap PT. Asuransi Takaful Umum dalam Putusan Nomor: 02/KPPU-I/2018 yang dalam hal ini diberikannya denda atas keterlambatan pemberitahuan pengambilalihan saham. Keterlambatan terjadi karena adanya kesalahpahaman Koperasi Simpan Pinjam JASA terkait sistem pemberitahuan melakukan pengambilalihan dan penerapan pengecualian Pasal 50 huruf (i) UU No. 5/1999 terhadap Koperasi. Koperasi Simpan Pinjam JASA menganggap bahwa kegiatan akuisisi tersebut sepenuhnya untuk anggota sehingga termasuk dalam pengecualian Penerapan hukum persaingan usaha dalam akuisisi saham sangatlah penting dalam rangka menghindari dampak persaingan usaha tidak sehat. Sehingga pengaturan akuisisi diperjelas dengan adanya PP No, 57/2010 dan Perkom No. 2/2013 dalam menganalisis kewajiban pemberitahuan serta jumlah batasan nilai aset dan/atau nilai penjualan dalam akuisisi saham.   Kata kunci: Akuisisi Saham, Persaingan Usaha, Pemberitahuan, Pengecualian
Co-Authors Abdul Aziz Alsa, Abdul Aziz Affila Agusmidah Agusmidah Agustina Pasaribu Ainun Syuhadah Lubis Aloysius Uwiyono Amin, Wan Liza Anak Agung Istri Sri Wiadnyani Azwar, Tengku Keizerina Devi Bakti Sukwanto Bismar Nasution Cahya Wijaya Chairul Bariah Chairul Bariah Cheryl Patriana Yuswar Chris Agave Valentin Berutu Christopher Iskandar Cindy Theresia Br Manurung Dedi Harianto Diennissa Putriyanda, Diennissa Dina Mariana Djodie, Mohammad Effan Dung, Tran Viet Edy Ikhsan Elbert, Elbert Eltisha Graciana Emya Pratidina Sembiring ESRA STEPHANI Evelyne Theresia Fernando Z. Tampubolon Hasim Purba Helen Apriyani Br. Pasaribu Hotman Bintang Parulian Aruan Hussein, Safinaz Mohd. Hutagalung, Cholid Hutapea, Kathrin Irawaty Noralinda Jelly Leviza Ladyta Tahany Reformita Marpaung Lesly Saviera Lubis, Ainun Syuhadah Lubis, Muhammad Abdul Ali Lubis, Tri Murti M. Hawin M. Yamin Lubis Mahmud Mulyadi Mahmud Siregar Mahmuddin Mahmuddin MAHMUL SIREGAR Mahmul Siregar Mahmul Siregar Marasamin Ritonga Maria Kaban Marlina, Marlina Marpaung, Ladyta Tahany Reformita MARSHIAS MEREAPUL GINTING Mohammad Reza Montayana Meher Muhammad Anggi Nasution Muhammad Hamdan Nadeak, Sugianto SP Nasution, Muhammad Anggi Porananond, Ploykaew Purba, M Hadyan Yunhas Putri Ayu Pratiwi Ramaiah, Angayar Kanni Rangkuti, Liza Hafidzah Yusuf Reggie Priscilla Ridho Pamungkas Robert Robert Robert, Robert Rosmalinda Rosmalinda Rumata Rosininta Sianya Runtung Runtung Runtung Sitepu Saidin, OK. Salim Abdurrahman Samuel Midian Tarigan Shania Meilisa Sinulingga, Tommy Aditia Sipahutar, Regina Lois Priscilla Sitepu, Runtung Solind Ruta Siregar Suhaidi Suhaidi Suheri Angga Sukamto Satoto Sukarja, Detania Sukwanto, Bakti Sunarmi Sutiarnoto Sutiarnoto Sutiarnoto Sutiarnoto T. Keizerina Devi T. Keizerina Devi Tan Kamello Taufik Hasudungan Sihotang Taufik Siregar Theddy Theddy Tri Murti Lubis Utami, Vira Dwi Vira Dwi Utami WINDHA WINDHA Yuriandi, Agung Yusuf, Darmawan