Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
4.011
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Legal Standing : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi Legalite: Jurnal Perundang Undangan dan Hukum Pidana Islam Jurnal Ilmu Hukum KYADIREN Jurnal Syntax Imperatif : Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Pendidikan Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis Jurnal Cahaya Mandalika Jurnal Nuansa Akademik: Jurnal Pembangunan Masyarakat Jurnal Humaya: Jurnal Hukum, Humaniora, Masyarakat, dan Budaya USRAH: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik (JIHHP) Jurnal Ilmu Multidisplin Aurelia: Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat Indonesia Journal of Community Health Provision Golden Ratio of Law and Social Policy Review (GRLSPR) AL-SULTHANIYAH Jurnal As-Syar’i: Jurnal Bimbingan & Konseling Keluarga
Prasetyo, Boedi
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Humanities Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Medicine & Pharmacology Nursing Public Health Social Sciences Veterinary

Published : 34 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 34 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4 
Implications of Disparities in District Court and Supreme Court Decisions in Realizing Justice: Implikasi Disparitas Putusan Pengadilan Negeri dan Mahkamah Agung dalam Mewujudkan Keadilan Tarnama, Eins Mitchelle; Prasetyo, Boedi
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1406

Abstract

The general background of this study lies in the central importance of judicial consistency in upholding legal certainty within Indonesia’s criminal justice system. The specific background concerns the contrasting outcomes in the Gregorius Ronald Tannur case, where the Surabaya District Court acquitted the defendant while the Supreme Court later imposed a prison sentence, revealing potential procedural irregularities and integrity issues within the judiciary. The knowledge gap emerges from the limited scholarly examination that systematically connects judicial disparity with its legal, institutional, and socio-justice implications. This study aims to analyze the disparity between Decision No. 454/Pid.B/2024/PN.Sby and Decision No. 1466/K/Pid/2024, and to evaluate its impact on public trust, legal certainty, and judicial accountability. The results show that differences in legal interpretation, assessment of evidence, procedural deviations, and external influences contribute significantly to the disparity, with substantial consequences for the perception of justice. The novelty of this research lies in offering an integrated normative–comparative analysis that links judicial reasoning, structural weaknesses, and ethical considerations within one evaluative framework. The implications emphasize the urgent need for strengthened judicial supervision, clearer sentencing guidelines, and systemic reforms to ensure fairness, transparency, and the restoration of public confidence in Indonesia’s legal system. Highlights: Highlights how differing court decisions undermine legal certainty and consistency. Emphasizes the role of judicial integrity in maintaining public confidence. Identifies the need for stronger oversight and clearer sentencing guidelines. Keywords: Judicial Disparity, Legal Certainty, Judicial Integrity, Sentencing Inconsistency, Public Trust
Inconsistency in the Implementation of Corruption Criminalization Guidelines Based on PERMA No. 1 of 2020 in the Harvey Moeis Case Decision Cristofel, Moses; Prasetyo, Boedi
Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kyadiren Vol 7 No 2 (2026): Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kyadiren
Publisher : PPPM, Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum (STIH) Biak-Papua

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.46924/jihk.v7i2.367

Abstract

This study analyzes the inconsistency in applying Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 1 of 2020 on Sentencing Guidelines for Corruption Cases in the Central Jakarta District Court Decision No. 70/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN.Jkt.Pst concerning Harvey Moeis. The research employs a normative juridical method with statutory and conceptual approaches, using library research on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials analyzed through a descriptive qualitative framework. The findings reveal that the sentencing failed to align with the principles of proportionality and justice mandated by PERMA No. 1 of 2020. Weak judicial oversight, subjective interpretation by judges, and declining professional ethics have led to sentencing disparities that erode public trust in judicial integrity. Systemic reconstruction is therefore required through stronger compliance mechanisms, an enhanced role of the Judicial Commission, and moral-based judicial training to ensure the consistent realization of substantive justice.
Legal and Bioethical Implications of Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) by Doctors in Indonesia Sarana, Harmin; Sutarno , Sutarno; Prasetyo, Boedi
Golden Ratio of Law and Social Policy Review Vol. 4 No. 2 (2025): January - June
Publisher : Manunggal Halim Jaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52970/grlspr.v4i2.1337

Abstract

This paper examines the legal and bioethical implications of Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) decisions made by physicians in Indonesia, using a juridical and literature analysis approach. DNR decisions, which involve withholding or discontinuing life-sustaining treatment, are complex and fraught with legal, ethical, and cultural challenges. In Indonesia, the lack of explicit legal guidance regarding DNR creates significant ambiguity for healthcare professionals. This paper examines the relationship between the legal framework, medical ethics, and cultural influences that shape these decisions. It highlights the role of autonomy, beneficence, impartiality, and justice in ethical considerations surrounding DNR. Furthermore, it considers the influence of Indonesia's largely religious and collectivist culture, which often places family decisions above patient autonomy. Through a literature review and legal analysis, this paper suggests the need for clearer guidelines and greater protections for healthcare providers involved in DNR decisions. It also proposes enhanced bioethics education for medical professionals and increased public awareness of patient rights in end-of-life care.
Kompetensi Pengadilan Negeri Dalam Pemutusan Sengketa Pemilihan Umum Di Indonesia Artana, I Putu Juni; Prasetyo, Boedi
Nuansa Akademik: Jurnal Pembangunan Masyarakat Vol. 10 No. 2 (2025): In Progress
Publisher : Lembaga Dakwah dan Pembangunan Masyarakat Universitas Cokroaminoto Yogyakarta (LDPM UCY)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47200/jnajpm.v10i2.3240

Abstract

This study examines the competence of the district court in resolving election disputes based on the Central Jakarta District Court Decision Number 757/Pdt.G/2022/PN Jkt Pst, which granted the People's Justice and Prosperity Party (PRIMA)'s lawsuit against the General Elections Commission (KPU) and ordered the suspension of the election stages. The lawsuit was constructed as an unlawful act (PMH), thus the District Court declared itself authorized to adjudicate the case. However, the KPU's actions in verifying political party administration constitute public legal action and fall within the scope of state administrative disputes. Based on Law No. 7 of 2017 concerning Elections, resolving disputes over election processes and decisions falls under the authority of the Elections Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) and the State Administrative Court (PTUN), while disputes over election results fall under the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. This District Court decision demonstrates a conflict of jurisdiction and ignores the principle of lex specialis derogat legi generali.
Co-Authors Al Mahdi, Muhammad Putra Syawal Aldiansyah, Riyan Giri Angel Monica, Racheline Arianto, Rafi Fadhlurrohman Arief Fahmi Lubis Artana, I Putu Juni Cristofel, Moses Dharmaputra, Rio Perdana Dwi Putra, Guntur Yudha Huring, Vinna Clarissa Husain, Bahtiar Idris, Berlian IVAN SAVERO, IVAN Kantikha, I Made Kusumawardhana, Vishnu Markoni Markoni Maulanda, Yogen Mulyono Mulyono Nasser, M Nasser, Nasser Nasution, Salsabila Putri Zahra Negoro, Luhung Wikant Bakti Nouval, Muh Dzaki Prastopo Prastopo, Prastopo Priscilia, Viona Reano, Arfan Refalia, Salsa Romlih, Rheihan Nurrizki Sahary, Fitry Taufik Sarana, Harmin Sastria, Evan Satriawan Satriawan, Satriawan Setyawan, Gerald Febrian Sibuea, Jhon Hausen Sidabutar, Hamonangan Priambodho Silitonga, Vera Dumonda Sitorus, Steven Soleh, Moh Sutarno , Sutarno Tarnama, Eins Mitchelle Tetty Melina Lubis Wijaya, jesica Natalia Wijayanti, Edy