Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
3.009
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Hukum Pidana dan Pembangunan Hukum Jurnal Hukum Prioris Reformasi Hukum Trisakti Amicus Curiae
Yogo Pamungkas
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Humanities Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 22 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 5 Documents
Search
Journal : Amicus Curiae

 1 
ANALISIS KOMPARASI PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA HASIL PEMILIHAN UMUM MENURUT HUKUM YANG BERLAKU DI NEGARA INDONESIA DENGAN NEGARA MALAYSIA: Comparative Analysis of Dispute Resolution of General Election Results According to the Laws Applicable in Indonesia and Malaysia Dewi Aisyah; Yogo Pamungkas
AMICUS CURIAE Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Amicus Curiae
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Trisakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25105/amicus.v2i2.23001

Abstract

Each country has different mechanisms for resolving election dispute results. The identification of the problem in this research is the comparison of election dispute resolution mechanisms in Indonesia and Malaysia to identify similarities, differences, advantages, and disadvantages. The research employs a normative legal method with a descriptive approach, utilizing secondary data through literature study. Data analysis is qualitative, with conclusions drawn deductively. Based on the research results and conclusions, it is concluded that both Indonesia and Malaysia have special institutions to handle election disputes, namely the Constitutional Court in Indonesia and the High Court in Malaysia. The main difference lies in the availability of legal remedies in Malaysia, while Indonesia does not have this. Indonesia’s advantage is a more detailed trial process regulation, whereas Malaysia’s advantage is a longer filing period allowing for the collection of more relevant evidence.
PERBANDINGAN PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA DALAM HUKUM INDONESIA DAN HUKUM SINGAPURA: Comparison Of Employment Termination Dispute Resolution In Indonesin Law And Singaporean Law Putri Qurrota'aini; Yogo Pamungkas
AMICUS CURIAE Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Amicus Curiae
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Trisakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25105/amicus.v2i2.23002

Abstract

Disputes between employers and employees can lead to industrial relations disputes. Indonesia as a country that adheres to the Civil Law legal system, uses Law No. 2/2024 as the legal basis regarding industrial relations disputes, while Singapore adheres to the Common Law legal system, using the Singapore Employment Act 1968 (Chapter 91) as the legal basis related to employment. The difference in the scope of authority between Indonesia and Singapore in the context of the authority of arbitration institutions shows differences in approaches to resolving labor disputes in the two countries. Identification problem that arises is how the advantages and disadvantages of resolving labor termination disputes in Indonesian law and Singapore law. This research uses normative legal research with secondary data. The nature of the research is descriptive and the conclusion is drawn by deductive method. Based on the results and the conclusio of the research when viewed from the similarities and differences between the settlement of employment termination disputes in Indonesian law and Singaporean law, Indonesia has the advantage of simplicity and independence of mediation, while Singapore highlights the advantages through more sophisticated and specialized mechanisms in resolving employment termination disputes.
KOMPETENSI RELATIF PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL TERHADAP PERSELISIHAN PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 106/PDT.SUS-PHI/2019/PN.PBR): Relative Competence at the Industrial Relations Court Regarding Termination of Employment Disputes (Study of Decision Number 106/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2019/Pn.Pbr) Arya Falah Al Multazam; Yogo Pamungkas
AMICUS CURIAE Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Amicus Curiae
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Trisakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25105/amicus.v2i2.23007

Abstract

Workers or labor unions related to issues related to employment relations. The purpose study was to determine the judge's considerations in deciding the dispute between Widodo Mulyadi and PT Antar Mitra Sembada Pekanbaru Branch Office in accordance with Law Number 2 of 2004 and to determine the decision Pekanbaru Industrial Relations Court Judge in examining and deciding the dispute over Termination Employment by PT Antar Mitra Sembada against Widodo Mulyadi in accordance with Laws and Regulations. The writing method uses normative studies. The conclusion drawn is that in Decision Number 106 / Pdt.Sus-PHI / 2019 / PN.Pbr based on evidence and facts during trial which proves that the Plaintiff is indeed an employee defendant, where in his last placement as Sales Coordinator Combo Semarang after Defendant submitted a demotion letter. In this case, Pekanbaru Industrial Relations Court should accept Defendant's Exception regarding Relative Competence. The decision Pekanbaru Industrial Relations Court Judge is not in accordance with Law Number 2 of 2004 concerning Settlement Industrial Relations Disputes, namely Article 81 concerning Relative Competence, which in final placementPlaintiff as Sales Coordinator Combo Semarang after Defendant submitted demotion letter and was registered as an employee of PT. Antarmitra Sembada Semarang Branch.
PENYELESAIAN PERSELISIHAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PUTUSAN NO. 27/PDT.SUS-PHI/2022/PN.MDN): Settlement Of Industrial Relations Disputes (Ruling No. 27/Pdt.Sus-Phi/2022/Pn.Mdn) Muhammad Faris Hilmy; Yogo Pamungkas
AMICUS CURIAE Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Amicus Curiae
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Trisakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25105/amicus.v2i2.23025

Abstract

Disputes or conflicts of interest between employers and workers/laborers often occur and are regulated in Law Number 2 of 2004 concerning Settlement of Industrial Relations Disputes. However, it is also different from the District Court decision Number 27/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2022/Pn.Mdn where an Industrial Relations Dispute occurred, namely the termination of employment relations but the Law was not implemented properly. The problem with this decision is firstly whether the termination of Ibrahim Simanjuntak's employment by PT. Is Tor Ganda in accordance with Law Number 13 of 2003 concerning Employment? and Second, whether the settlement of industrial relations between Ibrahim Simanjuntak and PT. Is Tor Ganda in accordance with Law Number 2 of 2004 concerning PPHI? This research uses normative law using secondary data made from primary, secondary and tertiary law, data processing techniques are carried out qualitatively by drawing conclusions using deductive methods. The conclusion of this research is that the termination of employment relations which turned out to be Ibrahim Simanjuntak's resignation or resignation was in accordance with Article 162 paragraph (4) of Law Number 13 of 2003 and the industrial relations settlement was invalid because it contained formal defects so that the PHI Panel of Judges decided It was wrong to hand down a decision which should be null and void by law.
PENOLAKAN PENERBITAN KEPUTUSAN OLEH LURAH KEPUTIH BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 30 TAHUN 2014 TENTANGADMINISTRASI PEMERINTAHAN (STUDI PUTUSAN PTUN SURABAYA NO.19/P/FP/2019/PTUN.SBY.): The Refusal to Issue a Decision by The Head of Keputih Village Based on Law Number 30 of 2014 Concerning Government Administration (Case Study of The Surabaya Administrative Court Decision NO.19/P/FP/2019/PTUN.SBY.) Axel Matthew Lambert Setyoadi; Yogo Pamungkas
AMICUS CURIAE Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Amicus Curiae
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Trisakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25105/amicus.v2i4.24695

Abstract

This study reviews the refusal to issue a decision by the Lurah Keputih based on Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration (Case Study of Surabaya Administrative Court Decision No. 19/P/FP/2019/PTUN.SBY). The main issue discussed in this study is whether the actions of Lurah Keputih in not issuing the requested certificate contradict Law No. 30 concerning Government Administration. To answer this issue, the research employs a juridical-normative method with a descriptive nature, using secondary data as the primary data processed qualitatively. Conclusions are drawn using deductive logic. This study concludes that the actions of the Government Official in not issuing the requested certificate without a reason that meets the requirements are contrary to Law No. 30 concerning Government Administration. The legal consequence of this act is that it constitutes a positive fictitious action due to the neglect in issuing a decision, and the concerned Government Official is subject to administrative sanctions such as paying court costs and issuing what was requested by the Applicant.
Co-Authors Alvira Zahra Hartono Arini Pertiwi Arya Falah Al Multazam Axel Matthew Lambert Setyoadi Dewi Aisyah Ghaly Odeliatama Sinulingga Hamdy Mubarok Hartono, Alvirazahra Indra Permana Janwardisan Hernandika Khairunnisa Dini Avianti Muhammad Faris Hilmy Muhammad Syukur Fezadi Iskandar Navyla Arjinia Putri Widjanarko Nina Stevany Malipolla Nur Azizah Ayu Salsabilla Putri Qurrota'aini Rana Sayyidah Nabilah Rayhan Putra Sena Renaldhy Ildha Subagja Syahdan Sabillah Zahra Putri Ariana