Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.92
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Nurani: Jurnal Kajian Syariah dan Masyarakat Sriwijaya Law Review Jurnal Yudisial Jurnal Kewarganegaraan Jurnal Kepastian Hukum dan Keadilan Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia
Ramiyanto .
Unknown Affiliation
Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

Published : 16 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 16 Documents
Search

 1   2 
KEDUDUKAN PENETAPAN TERSANGKA DI DALAM OBJEK GUGATAN PRAPERADILAN (THE POSITION OF THE DETERMINATION OF THE SUSPECT IN THE PRETRIAL LAWSUIT OBJECTS) ., Ramiyanto
Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia Vol 12, No 4 (2015): Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia - Desember 2015
Publisher : Direktorat Jenderal Peraturan Perundang-undang, Kementerian Hukum

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54629/jli.v12i4.418

Abstract

Objek gugatan praperadilan di dalam hukum positif Indonesia diatur oleh Pasal 1 angka 10 joPasal 77 KUHAP. Ketentuan itu mengalami perluasan setelah MK di dalam putusannyaNomor: 21/PUU-XII/2014 membatalkan Pasal 77 huruf a KUHAP. Dengan adanya putusanMK tersebut, maka objek gugatan praperadilan meliputi: sah atau tidaknya penangkapan,penahanan, penghentian penyidikan, penghentian penuntutan, dan tindakan lainnya, sertapermintaan ganti kerugian dan/atau rehabilitasi. Di dalam KUHAP tidak disebutkanpenetapan tersangka sebagai objek gugatan praperadilan. Dalam hal ini, kedudukan penetapantersangka bukan sebagai upaya paksa. Penetapan tersangka dapat dikategorikan sebagaitindakan administrasi penyidik yang dapat disamakan dengan penghentian penyidikan ataupenuntutan.
KEDUDUKAN PENETAPAN TERSANGKA DI DALAM OBJEK GUGATAN PRAPERADILAN (THE POSITION OF THE DETERMINATION OF THE SUSPECT IN THE PRETRIAL LAWSUIT OBJECTS) Ramiyanto, Ramiyanto
Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia Vol 12, No 4 (2015): Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia - Desember 2015
Publisher : Direktorat Jenderal Peraturan Perundang-undang, Kementerian Hukum

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54629/jli.v12i4.425

Abstract

Objek gugatan praperadilan di dalam hukum positif Indonesia diatur oleh Pasal 1 angka 10 jo Pasal 77 KUHAP. Ketentuan itu mengalami perluasan setelah MK di dalam putusannyaNomor: 21/PUU-XII/2014 membatalkan Pasal 77 huruf a KUHAP. Dengan adanya putusanMK tersebut, maka objek gugatan praperadilan meliputi: sah atau tidaknya penangkapan,penahanan, penghentian penyidikan, penghentian penuntutan, dan tindakan lainnya, sertapermintaan ganti kerugian dan/atau rehabilitasi. Di dalam KUHAP tidak disebutkanpenetapan tersangka sebagai objek gugatan praperadilan. Dalam hal ini, kedudukan penetapantersangka bukan sebagai upaya paksa. Penetapan tersangka dapat dikategorikan sebagaitindakan administrasi penyidik yang dapat disamakan dengan penghentian penyidikan ataupenuntutan.
PENANGANAN PERKARA KEKERASAN DALAM RUMAH TANGGA MELALUI KONSEP RESTORATIVE JUSTICE (DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SOLVING THROUGH RESTORATIVE JUSTICE) ., Ramiyanto
Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia Vol 12, No 2 (2015): Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia - Juni 2015
Publisher : Direktorat Jenderal Peraturan Perundang-undang, Kementerian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54629/jli.v12i2.404

Abstract

Restorative justice merupakan salah satu konsep dalam peradilan pidana yang digunakan untukmenanganai perkara pidana dengan mengintegrasikan pelaku dan korban atau masyarakatserta menjadikan pengadilan sebagai mediatornya. Kekerasan dalam rumah tanggamerupakan salah satu tindak pidana yang ada di Indonesia sebagaimana diatur oleh UU No.23 Tahun 2004. Salah satu cara yang dapat digunakan untuk menangani perkara kekerasandalam rumah tangga dengan konsep restorative justice adalah mediasi penal (penal mediation),yaitu penyelesaian perkara pidana di luar pengadilan. Adapun bentuk-bentuk kekerasan dalamrumah tangga yang dapat ditangani dengan cara tersebut adalah yang dikategorikan sebagaitindak pidana aduan (klacht delicten) dan termasuk sebagai tindak pidana ringan.
UPAYA PENANGGULANGAN TINDAK PIDANA PERKOSAAN DENGAN SARANA PENAL DALAM RANGKA MELINDUNGI PEREMPUAN Ramiyanto, Ramiyanto; Waliadin, Waliadin
Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia Vol 15, No 4 (2018): Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia - Desember 2018
Publisher : Direktorat Jenderal Peraturan Perundang-undang, Kementerian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54629/jli.v15i4.236

Abstract

Rape is one of the criminal acts regulated in the Criminal Code as stated in Article 285. When viewed from the formulation, the crime of rape stipulated in the provision is included in the type of formal crime. Article 285 of the Criminal Code has set limits on the meaning of rape and its elements but is not given an explanation of the meaning of each of these elements. Therefore, the granting of the meaning of each element of criminal acts of rape is seen in the doctrine and practice of criminal justice that has occurred so far. In its development, handling effort to criminal acts of rape by means of penal (criminal law) experienced a shift in the form of expanding the meaning of elements of “violence or threat of violence” as can be seen in the decision number: 410/Pid.B/2014/PNBgl. This element is not only classically interpreted, but also includes the persuasion accompanied by false promises. In the context of the protection of women, the decision should be appreciated and should be used as a reference by the judge in handling the same case even though it was not followed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. The expansion of the meaning of “violence or threat” as an element of criminal acts of rape can also be used as input for reforming criminal law in Indonesia.
BUKTI ELEKTRONIK SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI YANG SAH DALAM HUKUM ACARA PIDANA Ramiyanto, Ramiyanto
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 6 No 3 (2017)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.6.3.2017.463-484

Abstract

The Criminal Procedure Code as a general criminal procedure does not recognize electronic evidence as one of the admissible types of evidence. In practice, electronic evidence is also used as an admissible evidence to prove the criminal offenses in court. From the results of the discussion it can be concluded that electronic evidence in criminal procedure law is a dependent evidence and an independent evidence (substitution of letter proof if it meets the principle of functional equivalent approach and expansion of evidence) as specified in several special laws and instruments issued by the Supreme Court. The electronic evidence is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code as a lex generalis, however, to achieve material truth it can also be used as a valid evidence for the provision of all types of criminal offenses in court. It is based on recognition in the practice of criminal justice, some special laws, and instruments issued by the Supreme Court.Keywords: electronic evidence, admissible evidence, criminal procedure code, proof
ULTRA PETITA DECISIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF CRIMINAL LAW ENFORCEMENT IN INDONESIA Ramiyanto, Ramiyanto
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan Vol 10 No 1 (2021)
Publisher : Pusat Strategi Kebijakan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25216/jhp.10.1.2021.173-196

Abstract

The imposition of ultra petita decisions in the practice of criminal law enforcement in Indonesia continues to be going on today. This paper tries to examine the ultra petita decisions with the provisions in the Criminal Procedure Code, and the principle of freedom and the active role of judges. In answering the problem, the writer makes use of a type of normative legal research that’s done by researching positive law. The results of the discussion display that the Criminal Procedure Code doesn’t prohibit judges from imposing ultra petita decisions. In examining criminal cases, the judge can impose decisions that are outside of the requisition or exceed the requisition of the public prosecutor. The Criminal Procedure Code only stipulates that the basis for the judge in imposing a decision is the bill of indictment. Justification for the imposition of decisions is also based on the principle of judge freedomand judges are active. Under these two principles, judges are free to impose decisions without influence from other parties and actively searching for out facts that are revealed in court for the realization of material truth as the aims of criminal procedural law. The writer's recommendations are: 1) Criminal law enforcers (judges, public prosecutors, lawyers/ defendants) need to form a common awareness that ultra petita decisions are permitted; 2) The rule by which the judge gives the ultra petita decisions needs to be made immediately, each for the short and long term.
Co-Authors Antoni Silfy Maidianti Waliadin Waliadin Waliadin, Waliadin