Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
1.066
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL MAGISTER HUKUM UDAYANA Pembaharuan Hukum International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS) Baileo: Jurnal Sosial Humaniora
Setiawan Noerdajasakti
Faculty Of Law Universitas Brawijaya
Religion Humanities Environmental Science Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Social Sciences Other

Published : 6 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 6 Documents
Search

 1 
Relation Between Plea of Guilty and Defendants Right in RUU KUHAP (An Overview Through “Jalur Khusus” System) Intan Khoirun Nisa'; Abdul Madjid; Setiawan Noerdajasakti
Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) Vol 12 No 4 (2023)
Publisher : University of Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/JMHU.2023.v12.i04.p06

Abstract

The stacks of cases in judicial institutions hinder achieving the principles of fast, simple, low-cost justice. Through the Drafting Team for the Criminal Procedure Code Draft, the intention is to try to adopt a system that commonly applies in the common law legal system, namely plea bargaining “jalur khusus”” which is shown in Article 199 of the RUU KUHAP. This research intends to examine the concept of plea of guilty used in special channels and to look for the relationship between giving a plea of guilty and the rights of the defendant. This research uses normative juridical research methods or library legal research using conceptual and analytical approaches. The technique for collecting legal materials used is the library research model. From this research it can be concluded that the plea of guilty given by the defendant to the indictment by the public prosecutor must be voluntary, in this case, the judge will assess the truth of the Plea of Guilty. It brings consequences that the trial process will faster for the defendant. However, ““jalur khusus”” do not specifically regulate what defendant right will release if he confesses to the charges, moreover there is a gap that need to be resolve. This has the potential for uncertainty for the defendant. Apart from that, there is no regulation regarding the right to file legal action which will have an impact on the defendant's right to obtain legal certainty regarding efficient time to achieve a speedy trial.
INCONSISTENCY IN THE PROVISION OF RESTITUTION FOR VICTIMS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE CRIMES IN LIGHT OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS IN INDONESIA David Mangaraja Lumban Batu; Setiawan Noerdajasakti; Faizin Sulistio
International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS) Vol. 5 No. 3 (2025)
Publisher : CV. RADJA PUBLIKA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54443/ijerlas.v5i3.2816

Abstract

Indonesia, as a state governed by the rule of law, is committed to protecting human rights through the Criminal Justice System. One of the main challenges is the handling of sexual violence crimes. To this end, Law No. 12 of 2022 on Sexual Violence Crimes (UU TPKS) affirms the right to restitution for victims as part of their recovery. However, implementation in practice shows differences in judicial considerations and attitudes in determining restitution, despite its clear regulation in the law. This study aims to analyze the factors hindering the implementation of restitution for victims of sexual violence crimes, with a focus on cases carrying penalties exceeding four years. This research is expected to provide recommendations to enhance law enforcement compliance in fulfilling the obligation to provide restitution, thereby better protecting victims’ rights.
SENTENCING OF CHILD OFFENDERS UNDER 14 YEARS OLD IN CASES OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST CHILDREN BASED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE VICTIM Geraldo Gracelo Mario Situmeang; Setiawan Noerdajasakti; Abdul Madjid
International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS) Vol. 5 No. 3 (2025)
Publisher : CV. RADJA PUBLIKA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54443/ijerlas.v5i3.2823

Abstract

The imposition of sanctions on child offenders under 14 years old in cases of sexual violence against children presents a legal dilemma between protecting the child offender and upholding the rights of the victim. Law No. 11 of 2012 on the Juvenile Justice System (Law on Juvenile Justice System) stipulates that children under 14 years old may only be subjected to measures, while Law No. 12 of 2022 on Sexual Violence Crimes (Law on Sexual Violence Crimes) emphasizes victim protection and recovery. This article examines the imbalance between these two regulations and analyzes the most appropriate sanctions based on the principle of the best interests of the victim. Using a normative juridical approach and case studies, it is found that while the Law on Juvenile Justice System aims to protect child offenders from the adverse effects of criminal sanctions, in cases of sexual violence against children, this approach risks neglecting victims’ rights. Therefore, a more flexible legal interpretation is needed to ensure that sanctions not only focus on the offender but also consider justice for the victim.
REFORMULATION OF INDONESIA'S RESTORATIVE JUSTICE FRAMEWORK UNDER SUPREME COURT REGULATION NO. 1 OF 2024 Muhammad Hanif Ramadhan; Setiawan Noerdajasakti; Faizin Sulistio
International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS) Vol. 5 No. 5 (2025)
Publisher : CV. RADJA PUBLIKA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54443/ijerlas.v5i5.4187

Abstract

The Indonesian criminal justice system is undergoing a paradigm shift from a retributive to a restorative approach, solidified by the enactment of Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 2024 concerning Guidelines for Adjudicating Criminal Cases Based on Restorative Justice. This regulation aims to provide a standardized framework for judges. However, its practical implementation reveals a tension between formal legal certainty and the pursuit of substantive justice. This research conducts a normative legal analysis to evaluate the adequacy of the conditions and mechanisms within the Supreme Court Regulation as a guide for judges. The study employs statute, conceptual, and case approaches, analyzing primary and secondary legal materials. The findings indicate that the rigid requirements stipulated in the regulation, such as the limit on criminal threats, along with ambiguities in exclusionary clauses like recidivism, are insufficient and often hinder the achievement of substantive recovery. Furthermore, the absence of explicit procedural mechanisms for penal mediation forces judges to rely on discretionary activism. This journal argues for a reformulated regulation that is more flexible and principle-based, proposing the inclusion of a discretionary gateway for judges, harmonizing recidivism rules with the new National Criminal Code, and institutionalizing penal mediation procedures to ensure the restorative process is substantive and consistent.
Policing in the Shadows: Undercover Buying and the Social Construction of Legal Evidence in Indonesia’s Post-KUHAP 2025 Criminal Justice System Tubagus Heru Dharma Wijaya; Abdul Madjid; Setiawan Noerdajasakti; Lucky Endrawati
Baileo: Jurnal Sosial Humaniora Vol 3 No 3: May 2026
Publisher : Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30598/baileofisipvol3iss3pp705-722

Abstract

This study examines the sociological dynamics of undercover buying in Indonesia’s post–Criminal Procedure Code 2025 (KUHAP 2025) criminal justice system, focusing on the social construction of legal evidence through investigative practices. It addresses the tension between effective narcotics enforcement and the obligation to uphold due process and human rights. Moving beyond a purely normative legal perspective, the study analyzes how undercover buying operates as a social practice that shapes the production, interpretation, and legitimacy of evidence. A qualitative socio-legal approach is employed, integrating normative analysis of statutory frameworks with empirical data. Data are drawn from court decisions, legal documents, and case reports, complemented by in-depth interviews with law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and legal practitioners. Analysis is conducted interpretatively using a social construction framework to examine how evidence is produced and legitimized within institutional settings. The findings indicate that evidence derived from undercover buying is not inherently objective but emerges from interactions among investigators, suspects, and legal norms. The practice may blur the boundary between enforcement and the construction of criminal acts, particularly where entrapment or excessive intervention occurs. Despite strengthened procedural legality under KUHAP 2025, a gap remains between legal norms and implementation. This study offers novelty by conceptualizing undercover buying as a socio-legal practice that constructs legal reality. It contributes to Global South sociology of law and recommends clearer operational standards and community-based oversight to ensure accountable and rights-based criminal justice.
Hierarchical Authority of Indonesia’s Professional Disciplinary Board in Medical Malpractice: Ambiguity, Evidence, and Constitutional Legitimacy Heru Cahjono; Prija Djatmika; Setiawan Noerdajasakti
Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum Vol 12, No 3 (2025): Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum
Publisher : UNISSULA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26532/jph.v12i3.49061

Abstract

Medical malpractice lies at the intersection of healthcare and criminal law. In Indonesia, Law Number 17 of 2023 on Health introduced the Professional Disciplinary Board (Majelis Disiplin Profesi/MDP), replacing the MKDKI and granting it expanded authority, including recommending criminal investigations. Article 308(1) requires a prior MDP recommendation before prosecution, positioning the MDP as a procedural gatekeeper while creating ambiguity over whether its examination is mandatory or discretionary.This study analyzes the hierarchical authority of the MDP in managing medical malpractice cases, focusing on the evidentiary challenges in proving criminal elements and their implications for criminal law reform. Using a normative juridical approach combining statutory, conceptual, and case analyses, the study finds that Article 308(1) creates a de jure mandatory MDP review requirement that operates as de facto discretionary, producing fundamental legal uncertainty, cases bypassing the MDP suffer from procedural invalidity concerns, evidentiary quality deficiencies due to loss of specialized technical review, and inconsistent judicial outcomes across different court levels, and the MDP's constitutional legitimacy as a pre-judicial gatekeeper is questionable due to insufficient procedural safeguards (14-working-day timeframe), unclear separation of powers between administrative and judicial functions, and violation of the lex certa (legal certainty) principle essential to criminal law
Co-Authors Abdul Madjid Abdul Madjid David Mangaraja Lumban Batu Faizin Sulistio Geraldo Gracelo Mario Situmeang Heru Cahjono Intan Khoirun Nisa' Lucky Endrawati Muhammad Hanif Ramadhan Prija Djatmika Tubagus Heru Dharma Wijaya