Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.659
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Konstitusi Jurnal Konstitusi Indonesia Law Review (ILREV) Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan JILS (Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies)
Budi Suhariyanto, Budi
Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Hukum dan Peradilan MA-RI
Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Other

Published : 15 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 15 Documents
Search

 1   2 
MENUNTUT AKUNTABILITAS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN MELALUI PEMIDANAAN TERHADAP HAKIM Suhariyanto, Budi
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 1 No 2 (2012)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.1.2.2012.249-274

Abstract

Judiciary corruption of somejudges become the black stain of justice, than because of that public has been forced to demand accountability court rulling. The claim is becoming more and more as the filing of RUU MA, that includes a clause of punisment for the judges, and this is a reasonable question. This research is a legal normatif juridical approach, using the secondary data, than analized with qualitative juridical analysis methods. Based on the result of this research, we can concluded that a clause of punisment for tha judges (criminalizing judge) on RUU MA regulated, were not based on the principles of criminal policy. Infact, the crisis of overreach of the criminal law is what happens when the regulated repeatedly compel. Keywords: Accountability, Court, Criminality, Judge.
URGENSI PEMBANGUNAN YURISPRUDENSI PEMIDANAAN KORPORASI PELAKU KORUPSI UNTUK EFEKTIVITAS PENEGAKAN HUKUM DI INDONESIA / URGENCY OF JURISPRUDENCY DEVELOPMENT OF CORPORATION PUNISHMENT OF CORRUPTION ACTORS FOR EFFECTIVENESS OF LAW IN INDONESIA Suhariyanto, Budi
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 7 No 3 (2018)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.7.3.2018.459-482

Abstract

Realitas pemberantasan tindak pidana korporasi di Indonesia banyak mengalami kendala, termasuk dalam perkara korupsi. Ketiadaan yurisprudensi yang bisa dijadikan pedoman bagi penegak hukum dan hakim menjadi persoalan yang mendasar dalam mengatasi kegalauan yang selama ini ada.Menarik dipermasalahkan yaitu bagaimanakah urgensi pembangunan yurisprudensi pemidanaan korporasi Pelaku korupsi untuk efektivitas penegakan hukum di Indonesia? Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mendorong Mahkamah Agung menginisiasi pembentukan yurisprudensi pemidanaan korporasiPelaku korupsi. Jika telah ditetapkan sebagai yurisprudensi dapat berguna sebagai inspirasi dan dipedomani oleh penegak hukum dan hakim. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatankasus. Hasil pembahasan mengemukakan bahwa beberapa putusan pemidanaan terhadap korporasi Pelaku korupsi memiliki kaidah hukum baru yang perlu mendapatkan perhatian penegak hukum dan hakim Pengadilan Tipikor. Kaidah hukum baru tersebut perlu dipertimbangkan untuk dijadikan yurisprudensi sehingga bisa menjadi solusi atas kendala efektivitas pemberantasan korupsi korporasi yang selama ini ada. Mengingat persyaratan yurisprudensi pemidanaan korporasi Pelaku korupsi telah terpenuhi maka sesegera mungkin dapat dimulai proses dan tahapannya oleh Mahkamah Agung.The reality of the eradication of corporate crime in Indonesia has many obstacles, including in corruption cases. The absence of jurisprudence that can be used as a guide for law enforcers and judges to be a fundamental problem in overcoming the turmoil that has been there. Interest in question is how urgency of jurisprudence development corporations corruption Actors of corruption for the effectiveness of law enforcement in Indonesia? The purpose of this study is to encourage the Supreme Court to initiate the formation of corporate criminal prosecution jurisprudence. If it has been established as jurisprudence can be useful as an inspiration and guided by law enforcement and judges. This research uses normative research method with the approach of legislation, conceptual approach and approach of case. The results of the argument suggest that some criminal verdicts against corporations Perpetrators of corruption have new legal rules that need to get the attention of law enforcers and judges of the Corruption Court. The new law rules need to be considered for jurisprudence so that it can be a solution to the obstacles to the effectiveness of corruption eradication of corporations that have been there. In view of the requirements of corporations punishment lawsuit The perpetrators of corruption have been fulfilled as soon as possible can begin the process and its stages by the Supreme Court.
PERSINGGUNGAN KEWENANGAN MENGADILI PENYALAHGUNAAN DISKRESI ANTARA PENGADILAN TUN DAN PENGADILAN TIPIKOR / INTERCEPTION OF JUSTICE AUTHORITY OF DISCRETION ABUSE BETWEEN ADMINISTRATION COURT AND CORRUPTION COURTS Suhariyanto, Budi
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 7 No 2 (2018)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.7.2.2018.213-236

Abstract

Diskresi sebagai wewenang bebas, keberadaannya rentan akan disalahgunakan. Penyalahgunaan diskresi yang berimplikasi merugikan keuangan negara dapat dituntutkan pertanggungjawabannya secara hukum administrasi maupun hukum pidana. Mengingat selama ini peraturan perundang-undangan tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi tidak merumuskan secara rinci yang dimaksudkan unsur menyalahgunakan kewenangan maka para hakim menggunakan konsep penyalahgunaan wewenang dari hukum administrasi. Problema muncul saat diberlakukannya Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 dimana telah memicu persinggungan dalam hal kewenangan mengadili penyalahgunaan wewenang (termasuk diskresi) antara Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara dengan Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Pada perkembangannya, persinggungan kewenangan mengadili tersebut ditegaskan oleh Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2015 bahwa PTUN berwenang menerima, memeriksa, dan memutus permohonan penilaian ada atau tidak ada penyalahgunaan wewenang (termasuk diskresi) dalam Keputusan dan/atau Tindakan Pejabat Pemerintahan sebelum adanya proses pidana. Sehubungan tidak dijelaskan tentang definisi dan batasan proses pidana yang dimaksud, maka timbul penafsiran yang berbeda. Perlu diadakan kesepakatan bersama dan dituangkan dalam regulasi tentang tapal batas persinggungan yang jelas tanpa meniadakan kewenangan pengujian penyalahgunaan wewenang diskresi pada Pengadilan TUN.Discretion as free authority is vulnerable to being misused. The abuse of discretion implicating the state finance may be prosecuted by both administrative and criminal law. In view of the fact that the law on corruption eradication does not formulate in detail the intended element of authority abuse, the judges use the concept of authority abuse from administrative law. Problems arise when the enactment of Law No. 30 of 2014 triggered an interception in terms of justice/ adjudicate authority on authority abuse (including discretion) between the Administrative Court and Corruption Court. In its development, the interception of justice authority is affirmed by Regulation of the Supreme Court Number 4 of 2015 that the Administrative Court has the authority to receive, examine and decide upon the appeal there is or there is no misuse of authority in the Decision and / or Action of Government Officials prior to the criminal process. That is, shortly before the commencement of the criminal process then that's when the authority of PTUN decides to judge the misuse of authority over the case. In this context, Perma No. 4 of 2015 has imposed restrictions on the authority of the TUN Court in prosecuting the abuse of discretionary authority.
ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF LEGAL AID IN THE INDONESIAN COURT Suhariyanto, Budi; Mustafa, Cecep
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 11 No 2 (2022)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.11.2.2022.176-194

Abstract

This article examines the regulation and application of legal aid services in Indonesian Courts. Normatively, the guidelines for the provision of legal aid in court are based on the Law on Judicial Power, Law on General Courts, Law on Religious Courts and Law on State Administrative Courts, and Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 the year 2014 (Perma). On the one hand, there is incoherence in the provision where the law determines that free legal service (Posbakum) service supported any level of the court until the decision is legally binding and executable, whereas in Perma applicable for the district court. On the other hand, there is an expansion of the provision of legal aid services regulated by Perma, namely that the recipient of services is not required by the poor as stipulated by law, but also for those who cannot afford to pay for advocate services. The leniency of this requirement is to facilitate people who are not categorized as poor but cannot pay for the services of a lawyer. In addition, Perma also provides services in the form of Sessions Outside the Court Building (SLGP) to facilitate justice seekers who have limited access to transportation and accommodation for the distance from the court. So the inability of the justice-seeking community is also interpreted as the inability to access trials or litigate cases in court due to the remote location or difficulty in transportation and accommodation. There are several obstacles in providing legal aid services at the court, namely related to budget constraints, lack of socialization, and availability of facilities and infrastructure. This article contributes to the role of the Indonesian Court in providing unique access to justice.
CONTRADICTION OVER THE APPLICATION OF CORPORATE LIABILITY IN CORRUPTION COURT DECISIONS IN INDONESIA Suhariyanto, Budi; mustafa, cecep
Indonesia Law Review Vol. 13, No. 1
Publisher : UI Scholars Hub

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

Abstract

This paper presents and critically analyses the application of corporate criminal liability in the decisions of corruption crimes in Indonesia from 1999 to 2019. Of the seven corporate cases that have been prosecuted and convicted in this period. We identify 4 (four) corporate criminal liability models as follows. First, the corporation is accused, prosecuted, and convicted after the management has been convicted through a final and binding decision. Secondly, the corporation is excluded from the indictment but included in the sentencing. Third, the prosecution of corporate crimes negates the criminal liability of its management. Fourth, a portion of corporate criminal offenses is taken from the lack of punishment of its management. These four models cause a contradiction in normative perspectives. This paper contributes to the understanding of the context in which The Anti-Corruption Law shaped the judicial interpretation of corporate criminal liability
Co-Authors Fachrizal Afandi Lilik Mulyadi Muhammad S.R.P., Sri Gilang Mustafa, Cecep