Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 14 Documents
Search

KONSEP DIYAT SEBAGAI ALTERNATIF PEMIDANAAN DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA UNTUK MENGATASI FENOMENA OVERCAPACITY LEMBAGA PEMASYARAKATAN Marbun, Rocky
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 6 No 2 (2017)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.6.2.2017.189-212

Abstract

Through the ecletic-incorporation method and prismatic concept, the concept of diyat which has been modified will make it able to experience the unification of the law for the nation of Indonesia. Through the goodness and excellence of the concept of diyat, the author believes it is an alternative solution to the failure of the Criminal Justice System that is currently used. The main objective of the Paradigm of the Pancasila Law is not just to achieve justice, but also to achieve peace in the life of society, nation and state. Reversing the conditions of the community to its original state (restitutio in integrum) is the main goal in the Paradigm of the Pancasila Law. However, the infiltration process of the concept of diyat, must be realized through in-depth study, in particular against any criminal acts that can be applied. The concept of diyat in its essence also brings about a shrinkage of the powers of the judge in imposing imprisonment against perpetrators of certain crimes that are established by the Political Criminal Law and Criminal Law System in Indonesia, once peace and justice is achieved by the victims and / or their families. The writing of this paper uses normative juridical method with approach to legislation, conceptual approach, philosophical approach and sociological approach. Keywords: diyat, fiqh, jinayat, crime, society
FALLACY (SESAT PIKIR) ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM DALAM MOTIVERING VONNIS (PERTIMBANGAN HUKUM) / THE ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM FALLACY IN MOTIVERING VONIS (LEGAL REASONING) Marbun, Rocky; Armilius, nfn
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.7.2.2018.327-352

Abstract

Munculnya fallacy argumentum ad verecundiam dalam suatu putusan pengadilan merupakan suatu penalaran hukum yang tidak tepat, oleh karena penggunaan otoritas yang tidak dapat dibenarkan berdasarkan Ilmu Hukum, akan berakibat kepada validitas dari amar putusan—yang merupakan konklusi, yang dapat dibatalkan. Sifat pembatalan amar putusan tersebut bukanlah disebabkan karena amar putusannya yang tidak tepat, namun dikarenakan sumber logika yang digunakan adalah tidak tepat.The presence of the argumentum ad verecundiam fallacy in a court decision indicates erroneous legal reasoning, because the use of authority that cannot be justified based on the jurisprudence will affect the validity of the ruling, which is a conclusion of law, in that such ruling can be repealed. The repeal of the ruling is not because the ruling is incorrect, but because the source of the logic used is incorrect.
ADVOCATE IMMUNITY: QUO VADIS OF VALUE AND ETHICS IN LEGAL NORMS? Marbun, Rocky
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 8 No 1 (2019)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.8.1.2019.123-148

Abstract

If the value in the ethics of a particular profession is attributed to the property of that particular profession, then the judgment of a 'good faith' offense can only be traced through a mutual consensus agreed upon by those in the profession. However, in this case, the Researcher is not in a position to say an Advocate can not be convicted. The researcher is more respectful of the value that should be heard and raised surface on the hegemony of legal norms.
The Language Strategy of Power in the Separation of Case Files through the Concept of the Truth Game Marbun, Rocky; Sandiana, Erli; Sari, Dellia Rahma
Kosmik Hukum Vol. 26 No. 2 (2026)
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i2.26990

Abstract

The Criminal Procedure Code provides juridical rights based on the principle of functional differentiation, to the Public Prosecution Service of the Republic of Indonesia to make internal rules that will be implemented by the Public Prosecutor in the trial process of criminal cases. One of the authorities that is technically regulated by the Public Prosecutor's Office is the splitting of case files that contain elements of participation. This legal action is used to obtain witness testimony by confronting the Defendants. This article aims to show the violation of procedural law committed by the Public Prosecutor through its artificial authority in prosecuting criminal cases. The method used is a legal research method with a Trichotomy Relation Approach, namely the concept of Truth-Games based on secondary data. The result is that the Public Prosecutor utilizes internal rules as true knowledge in the form of written language and an Indictment to separate case files. The purpose of this legal action, was so that each defendant provide incriminating testimony against the other, under the shadows of criminal threats if they gave false testimony or refused to testify. Thus, this legal action is a violation of the principle of non-self-incrimination.