Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

THE ROLE OF THE INTELLIGENCE UNIT OF THE INTAN JAYA POLICE IN HANDLING ARMED GROUPS IN THE INTAN JAYA DISTRICT AREA Sigit Prasetyo, Tatag; Soekorini, Noenik; Ayuningtyas, Fitri; Hamdani, Fathul
Bureaucracy Journal : Indonesia Journal of Law and Social-Political Governance Vol. 5 No. 1 (2025): Bureaucracy Journal : Indonesia Journal of Law and Social-Political Governance
Publisher : Gapenas Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53363/bureau.v5i1.554

Abstract

A Police Security Intelligence (Intelkam) acts as the "eyes and ears" in early detection and anticipation of threats to security and public order (Kamtibmas). One of the main challenges faced is the armed criminal group (KKB) in Intan Jaya Regency, Central Papua, which often terrorizes civilians and armed contact with security forces. KKB aims to separate Papua from the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. This research aims to analyze the role and strategy of the Polres Intelkam unit in handling KKB in Intan Jaya. The method used is empirical legal research, which examines facts based on interviews and observations of police actions in dealing with this separatist group. The results showed that Intan Jaya Police implemented a mobilization strategy by working with community, religious and traditional leaders to build social resilience against the influence of separatism. In addition, Intelkam carries out the functions of investigation, security, and mobilization in its operations, both open and closed. In conclusion, the Intan Jaya Police Intelkam strategy plays an important role in creating conducive conditions and stemming the influence of KKB in the community through security and community approaches.
TINJAUAN YURIDIS TERHADAP PELAKSANAAN KETERBUKAAN INFORMASI PUBLIK BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 14 TAHUN 2008 TENTANG KETERBUKAAN INFORMASI PUBLIK Wisanggeni, Dimas; Sidarta, Dudik Djaja; Ayuningtyas, Fitri
Bureaucracy Journal : Indonesia Journal of Law and Social-Political Governance Vol. 5 No. 3 (2025): Bureaucracy Journal : Indonesia Journal of Law and Social-Political Governance
Publisher : Gapenas Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53363/bureau.v5i3.788

Abstract

Law No. 14 of 2008 on Public Information Disclosure (KIP Law) is a vital legal instrument for guaranteeing the public's right to information in order to realise transparent governance. This study examines the legal implementation of the KIP Law, focusing on analysing the implementation of public agencies' obligations and identifying factors that hinder its effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the extent to which the principle of information disclosure has been implemented and to identify legal obstacles in its implementation. This study is an empirical legal study using a qualitative approach. Data was obtained through a study of legislation, legal literature, and interviews with relevant parties at [Name of Public Agency/Research Location]. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive-analytical methods. The results of the study found that the implementation of PUBLIC INFORMATION DISCLOSURE LAW NUMBER 14 OF 2008 has not been fully effective. The main obstacles encountered include: (1) the suboptimal function and role of the Information and Documentation Management Officer (PPID); (2) a strong bureaucratic culture that is resistant to change; and (3) a lack of understanding and commitment from public agency officials in providing information. As a result, the fulfilment of the public's right to information is often hampered. To overcome this, efforts are needed to strengthen the PPID institution, increase human resource capacity, and enforce stricter sanctions for public agencies that do not comply with the provisions of the KIP Law
Pemidanaan terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Tanpa Hak Memiliki Narkotika Golongan I dalam Bentuk Tanaman (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 1614/PID.SUS/2025/PT SBY) Imron, Naufal Zaidaan Rahma Putra; Widodo, Ernu; Ayuningtyas, Fitri
RIGGS: Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Business Vol. 5 No. 1 (2026): Februari - April
Publisher : Prodi Bisnis Digital Universitas Pahlawan Tuanku Tambusai

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31004/riggs.v5i1.7037

Abstract

Maraknya peredaran narkotika yang telah merambah seluruh lapisan masyarakat, termasuk generasi muda, menimbulkan ancaman serius bagi keberlangsungan kehidupan bangsa dan negara. Narkotika memiliki dampak signifikan terhadap kondisi fisik dan mental. Dalam konteks medis, penggunaan narkotika dengan dosis tepat dan di bawah pengawasan tenaga kesehatan dapat bermanfaat untuk pengobatan maupun penelitian. Namun, penyalahgunaan yang terjadi di Indonesia menunjukkan penyimpangan dari fungsi tersebut, sehingga menimbulkan dampak negatif yang merugikan individu maupun masyarakat. Oleh karena itu, keberadaan regulasi yang tegas menjadi sangat penting, khususnya melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika. Penelitian ini membahas dua pokok permasalahan, yaitu pengaturan tindak pidana tanpa hak memiliki Narkotika Golongan I dalam bentuk tanaman menurut UU Narkotika, serta penjatuhan pidana oleh hakim dalam Putusan Nomor 1614/Pid.Sus/2025/PT Sby. Metode yang digunakan adalah pendekatan kasus (case approach) dan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) untuk menelaah penerapan norma hukum dalam praktik peradilan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa perbuatan tanpa hak memiliki Narkotika Golongan I dalam bentuk tanaman diatur secara tegas dalam Pasal 111 ayat (1) UU Narkotika sebagai ketentuan lex specialis terhadap Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana. Unsur deliknya meliputi “setiap orang”, “tanpa hak atau melawan hukum”, serta perbuatan memiliki, menyimpan, atau menguasai narkotika. Dalam putusan a quo, Pengadilan Tinggi Surabaya menguatkan pidana penjara 5 tahun dan denda Rp800.000.000,00 karena unsur delik terbukti sah dan meyakinkan. Penjatuhan pidana dinilai telah memenuhi asas legalitas, kepastian hukum, dan proporsionalitas, serta mencerminkan tujuan pemidanaan yang edukatif, preventif, korektif, dan represif.
Cargo Manifest Forgery by Shipping Administration Officers under Indonesian Criminal and Shipping Law Mahazalien, Zulfan Noor; Soekorini, Noenik; Hartoyo, Hartoyo; Ayuningtyas, Fitri; Marwiyah, Siti
JURNAL HUKUM SEHASEN Vol 12 No 1 (2026): April
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Dehasen

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37676/jhs.v12i2.10695

Abstract

This study examines the criminal liability of shipping administrative officers (krani) involved in the forgery of shipping documents without physical verification. The analysis refers to Article 263 of the Indonesian Criminal Code and Law No. 17 of 2008 on Shipping. It focuses on the dual role of the krani as both a technical executor and a subject of criminal liability, as illustrated in District Court Decision No. 323/Pid.Sus/2017/PT.DKI. Employing a normative legal method with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, the study draws upon statutory provisions, legal doctrines, and relevant jurisprudence. Findings indicate that shipping officers hold a crucial legal position within corporate responsibility chains. However, the regulatory framework lacks explicit boundaries regarding their authority and liability. The court concluded that the defendant had actively prepared and signed falsified documents without conducting proper verification, fulfilling the elements of criminal offense. Nevertheless, assigning criminal blame solely to lower-level officers may risk abuse of hierarchical power and allow impunity for supervisory officials. The study underscores the need for clearer legal norms delineating criminal responsibility between administrative personnel, superiors, and corporate entities. It recommends strengthening internal controls and implementing continuous compliance training to prevent the unjust criminalization of technical staff lacking substantive decision-making authority.