Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Mimbar Hukum AHKAM : Jurnal Hukum Islam dan Humaniora
Syarifah Zahra Al Haddar
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
THE REGULATION OF DISCLOSURE PRINCIPLE IN EQUITY CROWDFUNDING (A COMPARISON BETWEEN INDONESIA AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) Syarifah Zahra Al Haddar; Inda Rahadiyan
Mimbar Hukum Vol 33 No 2 (2021): Mimbar Hukum
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Gadjah Mada

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (368.905 KB) | DOI: 10.22146/mh.v33i2.2285

Abstract

Abstract Technological developments greatly make it easy for users, including in matters of financial technology (FinTech), which has also led to the innovation of Equity Crowdfunding (ECF). ECF is a new financing method seeking funding for Small Medium Enterprises (SMEs/UMKM) business development. In some developed countries such as the United States of America (US), the ECF has a systematic regulation of the disclosure principle. These rules are intended to protect the process of organising the ECF legally and professionally. In Indonesia, the ECF has just developed and has undergone two regulatory changes, from Financial Services Authority Regulations (POJK) No. 37 2018 to POJK No. 57 of 2020. The regulation of the disclosure principle in Indonesia is still not clear enough compared to the US based on Title III The Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Acts 2012. Thus, this study will explain the comparison between the two countries which is Indonesia and the US, regarding the regulation of the disclosure principle in ECF on the basis law, supervisory institutions, prospectus/ Bidding Documents, the minimum amount of fund. Abstrak Perkembangan teknologi sangat memberikan kemudahan bagi penggunanya tidak terkecuali dalam urusan financial technology (FinTech) yang memunculkan pula inovasi Equity Crowdfunding (ECF). ECF yaitu suatu metode pembiayaan baru mencari pendanaan untuk pengembangan Usaha Mikro Kecil Menengah (UMKM). Di beberapa negara maju seperti Amerika Serikat, ECF memiliki pengaturan prinsip keterbukaan secara sistematis. Aturan ini dimaksudkan untuk melindungi proses penyelenggaraan ECF secara legal dan profesional. Di Indonesia sendiri ECF baru saja berkembang dan sudah mengalami dua kali pergantian regulasi yaitu Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (POJK) No. 37 2018 menjadi POJK No. 57 tahun 2020. Pengaturan prinsip keterbukaan di Indonesia masih belum cukup jelas dibandingkan dengan Amerika Serikat yang berdasarkan Title III The Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Acts 2012. Dengan demikian, penelitian ini akan menjelaskan perbandingan kedua negara antara Indonesia dan Amerika Serikat terkait pengaturan prinsip keterbukaan pada penyelenggaraan Equity Crowdfunding terkait dasar hukum, lembaga pengawas, prospektus/Dokumen Penawaran, batas minimum jumlah penawaran penghimpunan dana, laporan keuangan penerbit, profesi penunjang, dan perlindungan investor.
Perjanjian Hipotek Kapal (Studi Komparatif antara Indonesia dan Amerika Serikat) Syarifah Zahra Al Haddar; Djoni Sumardi Gozali
AHKAM Vol 5 No 3 (2026): SEPTEMBER
Publisher : Lembaga Yasin AlSys

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58578/ahkam.v5i3.10978

Abstract

Although the regulation of ship mortgages has received attention in various maritime law studies in Indonesia, research that specifically compares Indonesia’s ship mortgage system with the United States preferred ship mortgage regime to evaluate its implications for legal certainty for creditors remains limited. This study aims to analyze the similarities and differences in the regulation of ship mortgages in Indonesia and the United States and to evaluate the implications of differences in registration mechanisms, claim priority, and enforcement for legal certainty in maritime financing. This study used a qualitative approach with a normative legal research type and a comparative design. Data were obtained through library research on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, including the Indonesian Civil Code, the Indonesian Commercial Code, Law Number 17 of 2008 concerning Shipping, the Ship Mortgage Act, the Commercial Instruments and Maritime Liens Act (CIMLA), as well as relevant maritime law doctrines and literature. The data were analyzed qualitatively through statutory, conceptual, and comparative legal approaches. The results show that Indonesia and the United States both recognize ships as objects of proprietary security rights and require mortgage registration, but differ fundamentally in their registration systems, regulation of claim priority, and enforcement mechanisms. The United States system provides stronger legal certainty through an integrated federal registration system, clearer regulation of claim priority, and an effective in rem action mechanism, whereas the Indonesian system still faces regulatory fragmentation and administrative obstacles. The conclusion of this study emphasizes the importance of reformulating ship mortgage regulation in Indonesia through regulatory harmonization, strengthening the national registration system, and improving enforcement mechanisms. These findings contribute to the development of studies on proprietary security law and maritime law and provide practical recommendations for policymakers in strengthening legal certainty in national maritime financing.
Co-Authors Djoni Sumardi Gozali Inda Rahadiyan