Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
1.978
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains Jurnal Multidisiplin Borobudur Jurnal Hukum Mimbar Justitia Asian Journal of Social and Humanities Constitutum: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum
Indah Kusuma Wardhani
Universitas Borobudur
Humanities Astronomy Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology Chemistry Computer Science & IT Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Earth & Planetary Sciences Economics, Econometrics & Finance Energy Engineering Environmental Science Health Professions Immunology & microbiology Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Materials Science & Nanotechnology Neuroscience Physics Social Sciences

Published : 12 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

 1   2 
Analysis of Court Decision on The Burden of Proof as A Legal Requirement for Divorce, based on The Civil Code and The Compilation of Islamic Law Andi Dedi Wijaya; Indah Kusuma Wardhani
Asian Journal of Social and Humanities Vol. 4 No. 8 (2026): Asian Journal of Social and Humanities
Publisher : Pelopor Publikasi Akademika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59888/ajosh.v4i8.723

Abstract

Marital life between husband and wife does not always go smoothly; couples experience numerous obstacles that drive them to opt for divorce. This situation also affects Catholic couples, many of whom choose to file for divorce through state courts even though the Catholic Church forbids and does not recognize divorce. The normative juridical research method with a case study approach utilizing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials is the research methodology employed. The application of the burden of proof in divorce proceedings, as well as the perspectives of positive law and the Catholic Church regarding the legitimate requirements for divorce, are the research issues investigated. The findings demonstrate that the judge's reasoning in the ruling — which states that the plaintiff must prove the grounds for divorce as outlined in Article 163 HIR — is satisfied by written evidence and two witnesses who attest that the Catholic couple seeking a divorce has, in fact, not lived together for an extended period. Positive law views divorce as a right of married couples, in contrast to Catholicism, which regards marriage as sacred and indissoluble and holds that a Catholic marriage can only be dissolved by death. In other words, if one of the Catholic parties remarries after the state court has dissolved the first marriage, the Catholic Church still considers the prior marriage to be valid and the new marriage to be invalid, classifying it as adultery.
The Ambiguity of Norms in Legal Protection for Advocates and the Problem of the Limits of Good Faith in the Criminal Justice System Arih Wira Suranta; Indah Kusuma Wardhani
Asian Journal of Social and Humanities Vol. 4 No. 10 (2026): Asian Journal of Social and Humanities
Publisher : Pelopor Publikasi Akademika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59888/ajosh.v4i10.737

Abstract

Legal protection for advocates is a fundamental prerequisite for the realization of fair trials, particularly in ensuring the independence of the defense function within the criminal justice system. The regulation of advocate immunity rights in Article 149 paragraph (2) of Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code normatively guarantees that advocates cannot be prosecuted criminally or civilly in the exercise of their profession, but this protection is limited by the phrase "good faith," which has no operational definition or objective parameters. This gap creates normative ambiguity that generates tension between protection and restriction, with implications for legal uncertainty and the potential criminalization of advocates arising from disparate interpretations by law enforcement officials. This study aims to analyze the normative construction of advocate immunity, examine the conceptual problems of "good faith" as the boundary of immunity, and evaluate its implications for legal certainty and professional independence. The method employed is normative juridical research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. The research findings indicate that the absence of measurable indicators for assessing "good faith" leaves room for excessive discretion and weakens the effectiveness of advocate protection. This study proposes a reconstruction of the concept of "good faith" through the formulation of an operational definition grounded in the advocacy function, the use of professional standards and codes of ethics as objective parameters, and regulatory harmonization to strengthen legal certainty within the criminal justice system.
Co-Authors Aji Sena Pamungkas Andi Dedi Wijaya Arih Wira Suranta Eko Cahyono Fauzan Fadly Somar Fawzia Apriandini Firdaus Addar Megawati Barthos Raden Farrel Dharma Osmar Sriyono Stefanus Pattipeilohy