Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.751
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL HUKUM SIGn Jurnal Hukum
Hulman Panjaitan
Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Indonesia
Religion Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 4 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
Strengthening Consumer Protection in Digital Transactions: A Legal Perspective on Click-Wrap Agreements Under the Consumer Protection Law Hulman Panjaitan; Junimart Girsang; Moermahadi Soerja Djanegara; Md Hasnath Kabir Fahim
Jurnal Hukum Vol 41, No 3 (2025): Jurnal Hukum
Publisher : Unissula

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26532/jh.v41i3.47262

Abstract

This study examines the effectiveness of consumer protection in Indonesia’s digital transactions, with a focus on click-wrap agreements. It addresses three key questions: the normative application of consumer protection laws, the practical challenges in enforcing these laws in online markets, and strategies to strengthen legal safeguards. Using a normative and conceptual juridical approach, the research analyzes relevant legislation, including the consumer protection law, electronic information and transactions law, personal data protection law, Government Regulation Number 80/2019, and Minister of Trade Regulation Number 31/2023. Literature review and legal documents, such as academic studies, court decisions, and government policies, were also examined to assess compliance, identify ambiguous clauses, and evaluate protection mechanisms. Findings indicate that while Indonesia has legal framework guaranteeing consumer rights to accurate information, safety, compensation, and data privacy, practical enforcement remains limited. Click-wrap agreements often contain complex or non-negotiable clauses that reduce consumers’ ability to exercise their rights. Strengthening legal mechanisms, including online dispute resolution, enhanced capacity of the consumer dispute resolution agency, digital consumer literacy, and regulatory harmonization, is essential to bridge the gap between law and practice. Coordinated implementation of these measures can ensure effective, transparent, and equitable protection for digital consumers.
A Dual-Track Asset Recovery Model: Optimizing the Posthumous Forfeiture of Corruption Proceeds Anang Suhartono; John Pieris; Aarce Tehupeiory; Hulman Panjaitan
SIGn Jurnal Hukum Vol 8 No 1: April - September 2026
Publisher : CV. Social Politic Genius (SIGn)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37276/sjh.v8i1.700

Abstract

The transition of national positive law following the enactment of Law Number 1 of 2023 and Law Number 20 of 2025 creates a doctrinal inconsistency arising from a legislative omission in determining the legal status of evidence when personal criminal prosecution (in personam) is extinguished by operation of law upon the death of a corruption suspect. This normative weakness is reinforced by the inherent limitation of the sequential system under Law Number 31 of 1999. Under this system, civil claims by the State Attorney may be initiated only after the criminal process has been terminated or can no longer proceed, thereby causing asset depreciation and creating a time interval that enables the dissipation of corruption proceeds. This study employs normative legal research with a conceptual approach as the primary approach and a statute approach as the supporting approach through prescriptive qualitative analysis. The findings propose a paradigmatic reconstruction toward a parallel-simultaneous system through a dual-track asset recovery model. Under this model, the proprietary status examination (in rem) may proceed independently without depending on the legal status of the person subject to criminal prosecution. This model strengthens balanced legal protection and due process of law by applying the evidentiary standard of a balance of probabilities. This study recommends accelerating the enactment of the Bill on Asset Forfeiture, adopting limited amendments to Law Number 31 of 1999 and Law Number 20 of 2025, and establishing an integrated asset recovery center to optimize the posthumous forfeiture of corruption proceeds and restore public trust in law enforcement.
Policy Reconstruction in Combating Petty Corruption: Towards Progressive, Economic, and Utilitarian Justice Andhika Prima Sandhy; John Pieris; Aarce Tehupeiory; Hulman Panjaitan
SIGn Jurnal Hukum Vol 8 No 1: April - September 2026
Publisher : CV. Social Politic Genius (SIGn)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37276/sjh.v8i1.701

Abstract

Combating petty corruption in Indonesia raises normative and budgetary concerns when case-handling costs exceed the losses to state finances or the national economy that can be recovered. This issue must not be understood as a defence of corruption offenders, as corruption remains an extraordinary crime that harms state finances and the social and economic rights of society. The main problem lies in the absence of categorisation of losses to state finances or the national economy under positive law, which results in low-value corruption cases being processed through the formal criminal justice mechanism. This condition is related to Article 4 of Law Number 31 of 1999, which provides that restitution of state financial losses does not extinguish the offender’s criminal punishment. Law Number 1 of 2023 has regulated categories of criminal fines, but it has not established a nominal classification of state losses. This constraint is further reinforced by Article 82 letter c of Law Number 20 of 2025, which excludes corruption crimes from the Restorative Justice mechanism. This study aims to evaluate the urgency of legal reform and construct the Progressive-Economic-Utilitarian Justice Model as a prescriptive recommendation for the legislature. This study employs normative legal research, drawing on conceptual, philosophical, and comparative jurisdictional approaches. The findings show that processing micro-value corruption cases through the formal criminal justice mechanism may result in cumulative losses for the state, namely losses from the criminal offence and additional costs arising from disproportionate law enforcement. As a prescriptive solution, the Progressive-Economic-Utilitarian Justice Model requires limited reform of sentencing norms, a legal basis for the limited application of Restorative Justice, and the legalisation of a maximum state-loss threshold of IDR 50 million as the law as it ought to be (ius constituendum). This mechanism must be subject to restitution of at least 200% of the losses to state finances or the national economy caused by the offence to prevent impunity. Accordingly, the Progressive-Economic-Utilitarian Justice Model is directed as a strict loss-recovery mechanism to protect state finances and the social and economic rights of society.
The Qualified Mens Rea Model: Layered Culpability in General Commodity Smuggling Offenses Implicating Corruption R. Bayu Probo Sutopo; John Pieris; Aarce Tehupeiory; Hulman Panjaitan
SIGn Jurnal Hukum Vol 8 No 1: April - September 2026
Publisher : CV. Social Politic Genius (SIGn)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37276/sjh.v8i1.702

Abstract

The national criminal justice system continues to face difficulties in proving criminal intent (mens rea) in general commodity smuggling offenses that are normatively connected to corruption offenses. These difficulties arise when the proof of culpability is directed solely at the individual mental state. In contrast, modern economic offenses are often committed through corporations, sequences of goods transportation activities, customs documentation management, and the exercise of official authority. This study aims to develop an instrument to evaluate the culpability of state apparatuses and corporate entities proportionately, without exceeding the principle of legality. This study employs normative legal research using a statute approach, a conceptual approach, and a limited comparative approach. Comparative legal doctrines, such as corporate recklessness, the responsible corporate officer doctrine, conscious disregard of substantial risk, and willful blindness, are used as conceptual instruments rather than as direct bases for criminal punishment. The findings show that the Qualified Mens Rea Model can be constructed as a layered evaluative framework comprising subjective, normative, corporate-functional, and corruption-functional dimensions. The model is then operationalized as a Layered Evidentiary Mechanism Matrix that situates Law Number 17 of 2006, Law Number 20 of 2001, and Law Number 1 of 2023 within an interrelated normative framework. This study concludes that the model can assist judges in more accurately distinguishing general commodity smuggling offenses, abuse of authority, office-related bribery, and lawful policy discretion.
Co-Authors Aarce Tehupeiory Anang Suhartono Andhika Prima Sandhy John Pieris Junimart Girsang Md Hasnath Kabir Fahim Moermahadi Soerja Djanegara R. Bayu Probo Sutopo