Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
3.593
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal SUPREMASI: Jurnal Pemikiran, Penelitian Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial, Hukum dan Pengajarannya Syntax Literate: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia Unes Law Review CITRA JUSTICIA : Majalah Hukum dan Dinamika Kemasyarakatan UNES Journal of Swara Justisia International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS) Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik (JIHHP) Jurnal AKAL: Abdimas dan Kearifan Lokal Hukum Pidana dan Pembangunan Hukum Jurnal Hukum Prioris Reformasi Hukum Trisakti The Easta Journal Law and Human Rights Jurnal As-Syar’i: Jurnal Bimbingan & Konseling Keluarga Amicus Curiae
Rosdiana Saleh, Rosdiana
Faculty Of Law Universitas Trisakti
Religion Humanities Automotive Engineering Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Physics Public Health Social Sciences Transportation Other

Published : 26 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 26 Documents
Search

 1   2   3 
A Juridical Study of Constitutional Court Decision No. 58/PUU-VIII/2010 on the Right to Education and Non-Discrimination in Indonesia Dewi, Sari Amalia; Uwiyono, Aloysius; Saleh, Rosdiana
The Easta Journal Law and Human Rights Vol. 4 No. 01 (2025): The Easta Journal Law and Human Rights (ESLHR)
Publisher : Eastasouth Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58812/eslhr.v4i01.781

Abstract

This study presents a normative juridical analysis of Constitutional Court Decision Number 58/PUU-VIII/2010, which addresses the constitutional right to education and the principle of non-discrimination in Indonesia. The decision represents a significant advancement in Indonesian constitutional jurisprudence, affirming the state’s obligation to ensure equal access to education as mandated by Article 31 of the 1945 Constitution. Using a normative legal approach, this study examines the Court’s reasoning, relevant constitutional provisions, and the decision’s broader implications for human rights and educational equity. The findings show that the Constitutional Court emphasized education as a fundamental and universal right, requiring the state to adopt affirmative measures to eliminate structural inequalities and discriminatory practices in educational policy. The decision aligns national law with international human rights instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Overall, this study concludes that Decision Number 58/PUU-VIII/2010 strengthens Indonesia’s constitutional framework for protecting the right to education and reinforces the state’s responsibility to promote equality, inclusivity, and social justice within the education system.
Perbandingan Sistem Hukum Indonesia dan Malaysia Tentang E-Court Azhari, Rizka Anugrah; Saleh, Rosdiana
Syntax Literate Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia
Publisher : Syntax Corporation

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36418/syntax-literate.v9i9.17292

Abstract

Pengadilan agama adalah salah satu pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman bagi rakyat pencari keadilan yang beragama Islam mengenai masalah tertentu seperti perkawinan, warisan, wasiat, hibah wakaf, shodaqoh, dan ekonomi syari'ah. Dalam perkembangannya, mereka kini menggunakan aplikasi e-court sesuai dengan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung No. 1 Tahun 2019 tentang administrasi perkara secara elektronik. Dengan demikian, penulis ingin mempelajari lebih lanjut tentang masalah administrasi upaya hukum dan persidangan kasasi secara elektronik, juga dikenal sebagai e-court, di pengadilan agama. Penelitian mereka berpusat pada teori sistem hukum Lawrence M. Friedman dan membahas implementasi administrasi perkara kasasi di pengadilan agama. Penelitian ini bersifat normatif-empiris dan kualitatif, dan untuk mengumpulkan data, penelitian ini menggunakan studi pustaka. Administrasi upaya hukum kasasi e-court meliputi permohonan upaya hukum kasasi, pembayaran biaya perkara, pembuatan akta permohonan kasasi, pemberitahuan kepada termohon tentang upaya hukum, pengiriman memori, kontra memori, inzage, pengiriman berkas, dan pencabutan. Salah satu masalah yang menghalangi penggunaan pengadilan elektronik, terutama untuk upaya hukum kasasi elektronik, adalah jaringan. Ketika jaringan tidak stabil, mereka kadang-kadang tidak dapat mengupload dokumen. Dengan demikian, Pengadilan Agama Raha telah mendirikan pusat pengadilan elektronik untuk membantu masyarakat jika mereka menghadapi masalah ketika menggunakan sistem pengadilan elektronik. Upaya hukum kasasi sistem e-court ini meningkatkan kelancaran, kemudahan, dan kesuksesan bagi penggunanya.
Perbandingan Sistem Hukum Indonesia dan Australia Tentang Pengaturan Pertimbangan Bisnis (Business Judgement) Muninggar, Roro Ajeng; Saleh, Rosdiana
UNES Law Review Vol. 6 No. 3 (2024)
Publisher : Universitas Ekasakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31933/unesrev.v6i3.1821

Abstract

The legal systems adopted by Indonesia and Australia have differences, Indonesia adheres to civil law while Australia adheres to common law. The author in this study intends to conduct a comparative study of the legal system between Indonesia and Australia regarding business judgment arrangements. The issues studied are about the similarities and differences between business judgment arrangements in Indonesia and Australia, as well as the factors that cause these similarities and differences. The author uses normative methods by using a legal approach in the preparation of this study. The results of the comparison of legal systems between Indonesia and Australia have similarities, namely in terms of legal rules where both already have written legal rules, and the second in terms of regulating business judgment for the Board of Directors, while the differences that are seen are different legal systems, implementation of written rules, origin of rules, substance of rules, and position of jurisprudence. The factors that cause these similarities and differences include historical factors of the country, thinking characteristics, and economics.
Perbandingan Sistem Hukum Antara Indonesia dan Malaysia Terkait Peninjauan Kembali Imam Basuki Rahmanto; Rosdiana Saleh
As-Syar i: Jurnal Bimbingan & Konseling Keluarga  Vol. 6 No. 4 (2024): As-Syar’i: Jurnal Bimbingan & Konseling Keluarga
Publisher : Institut Agama Islam Nasional Laa Roiba Bogor

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47467/as.v6i4.5505

Abstract

Judicial review serves as one of the major backbones of the judicial system in any democratic polity. It ensures the consolidation of democracy because it serves as the principal mechanism of check-and-balance among the three tiers of government in any democratic setting and protects the rights of any aggrieved citizen who is presumed to have been unjustly prosecuted or governed. Given this, the present research focuses on investigating the core ideas of judicial review and its procedures in Indonesia and compares them to Malaysia’s judicial review model and procedures. Ultimately, the present study comes up with a judicial review practice model from the comparative analysis of the judicial review practices of Indonesia and Malaysia. A qualitative research methodology was adopted, and comparative analysis using desktop research design was conducted. It is found from the research that the dualistic judicial review model is quite problematic in terms of application in the Indonesian context, and the institution of the Judicial Ethics Commission (JEC) in Malaysia is likely to be effective for judicial review execution. From the findings, the study suggests a review of the current dualistic judicial review model adopted in Indonesia due to several flaws. The study comes up with an integrated judicial review model based on the comparative analysis of judicial review practices of both Indonesia and Malaysia. This research contributes to the field of legal studies through the four mechanisms of judicial review practice, i.e., judicial independence, easy access to justice, procedural fairness and judicial transparency. It is believed that the integrated model of judicial review and the four mechanisms for judicial review could serve as practical tools for enhanced judicial review practices in Malaysia and Indonesia as well as other countries across the world.
PERBANDINGAN PENGATURAN PENGADAAN BARANG DAN JASA DI LINGKUP BUMN ANTARA NEGARA INDONESIA DAN MALAYSIA: Comparison Of Arrangement For The Procurement Goods And Services Within The Scope Of Soes Between Indonesia And Malaysia Raizidane Zavier Rais; Rosdiana Saleh
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.v2i4.24688

Abstract

Government procurement of goods and services plays an important role in encouraging economic growth for the welfare of the people. SOEs as strategic economic actors also support the national economy based on the principles of economic democracy. In procuring goods and services, SOEs have Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. In Indonesia, procurement is regulated through the Regulation of the Minister of SOEs Number PER-2/MBU/03/2023 with a normative and bureaucratic approach that emphasizes procedural compliance. Malaysia through the Red Book: Procurement Guidelines & Best Practices adopts a strategic and flexible approach oriented towards Good Corporate Governance and value for money. This study identification problem about the similarities and differences in Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the procurement of goods and services within the scope of Indonesian and Malaysian SOEs, as well as the obstacles in conducting legal comparisons. The method used is normative with a descriptive analytical legal comparative approach. The results and conclution of article show that while both uphold the principles of transparency and accountability, Malaysia's system more adaptive and innovative through digitalization. Indonesia still faces bureaucratic and institutional challenges. Legal comparative obstacles arise from differences in the basic legal system adopted by each country.
Perbandingan Sistem Hukum Indonesia Dengan Republik Rakyat Tiongkok Tentang Pembuktian Hukum Acara Pidana Agus Sugiyatmo; Rosdiana Saleh
Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik Vol. 4 No. 4 (2024): (JIHHP) Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik (Mei - Juni 2024)
Publisher : Dinasti Review Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.38035/jihhp.v4i4.2071

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji unsur-unsur yang berkontribusi terhadap persamaan dan perbedaan system verifikasi hukum acara pidana Indonesia dan Republik Rakyat Tiongkok. Sistem hukum di seluruh dunia menunjukkan sedikit variasi, namun wawasan berharga dapat diperoleh melalui analisis komparatif. Metodologi penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian yuridis normatif deskriptif. Proses pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan melakukan penelitian kepustakaan yang dilanjutkan dengan analisis data kualitatif. Analisis ini memungkinkan pengembangan temuan menggunakan logika deduktif. Peter de Cruz mendefinisikan studi substantif dalam studi hukum (komparatif) sebagai proses membandingkan peraturan perundang-undangan di berbagai negara untuk mengidentifikasi persamaan dan perbedaan ketentuannya mengenai hukum acara pidana, termasuk yang mengatur sistemnya. Verifikasi. Friedman berpendapat bahwa hukum adalah kerangka kompleks yang terdiri dari tiga elemen mendasar: substansi hukum, struktur hukum, dan budaya hukum. Diskusi tersebut menghasilkan dua temuan utama: pertama, baik Indonesia maupun Republik Rakyat Tiongkok memiliki kesamaan dalam sistem pembuktian, khususnya dalam Pembuktian Perkara Pidana, karena keduanya bertujuan untuk mengungkap kebeneran dalam suatu perkara pidana. Kedua, kedua negara memiliki kerangka hukum yang jelas untuk berbagai jenis bukti dalam kasus pidana, seperti pernyataan saksi dan pernyataan terdakwa, meskipun dengan tujuan yang berbeda - Indonesia menggunakan bukti untuk membantu pengambilan keputusan, sedangkan Tiongkok menggunakannya untuk memverifikasi kebenerannya, Indonesia mengacu pada pasal 183-189 Kitab Undang – Undang Hukum Acara Pidana, sedangkan Republik Rakyat Tiongkok menggunakan pasal 42-49 Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. Faktor penyebab perbedaan sistem tersebut antara lain: pertama, vissi dan missi masing-masing pemerintahan, kedua, sistem pemerintahan yang dianutnya, ketiga, koondisi budaya bangsa, dan terakhir, kondisi sosiologis masyarakat.
Co-Authors Abrianti, Sharda Adhyaksa Muhammad Ilham Soekotjo Agung Wijaya Agus Sugiyatmo Agus Sugiyatmo Aloysius Uwiyono Azhari, Rizka Anugrah Bonifansius Sulimas Christine S.T. Kansil Christine S.T. Kansil Dewi, Sari Amalia Eriyantouw Wahid Hasibuan, Laura Erika Imam Basuki Rahmanto Kerti, Renti Maharaini Martadikusuma, Ade Darajat Masyitoh Yahya Sinaga Muhammad Firmandhana Jati Kusuma Muninggar, Roro Ajeng Muriani Muriani Ningrum, Rinandu Kusumajaya Qonita, Leilani Tertia Rahayu Eka Pratiwi Neoe, Sry Raizidane Zavier Rais Simona Bustani, Simona Siska Dwi Andini Sry Rahayu Eka Pratiwi Neoe Sugiastuti, Yunita Supartono, Sugeng Utomo, Prihady Zaki Fachrezi