Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Aladalah: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora Mandub: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora
Sapta Eka Yanto
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Comparative Analysis of Business Judgment Rules in Civil Law and Common Law Systems Sugiarto Sugiarto; Sapta Eka Yanto; Sudiyanto Sudiyanto; Panji Riyadi; Purnomo Purnomo; Royan Siagian; Zainal Arifin Hosein
Mandub : Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora Vol. 2 No. 4 (2024): Desember : Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora
Publisher : STAI YPIQ BAUBAU, SULAWESI TENGGARA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59059/mandub.v2i4.1753

Abstract

This study examines the comparative regulation of the Business Judgment Rule (BJR) between countries adopting Civil and Common Law systems. BJR is a principle that grants corporate decision-makers the discretion to make business decisions without fear of legal liability, provided that the decisions are made in good faith, are reasonable, and free from conflicts of interest. This research aims to identify the similarities and differences in the regulation of BJR between civil law and common law countries and analyze the factors contributing to these differences. This research employs a normative juridical method with a legislative and comparative law approach. These approaches are utilized to analyze relevant national and international legislation and compare the application of BJR in Indonesia with that of other countries, such as the United States and European nations. The findings are expected to provide insights into the philosophical and practical differences in the regulation and implementation of BJR across these two legal systems.
Comparison of Dispute Resolution Through Mediation in Indonesia and Japan Sapta Eka Yanto; Zainal Arifin Hosein
ALADALAH: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora
Publisher : Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Syariah Nurul Qarnain Jember

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59246/aladalah.v3i1.1103

Abstract

This study aims to compare the mediation systems in Indonesia and Japan, focusing on procedural differences and similarities, as well as the factors influencing their implementation in both countries. Mediation as an alternative dispute resolution offers a more peaceful and efficient solution, reducing the burden on courts. In Indonesia, mediation is regulated by the Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 1 of 2016, which mandates that mediation be conducted at the early stages of the trial with non-judge mediators. In contrast, Japan's wakai system allows mediation to occur at various stages of the judicial process with judges serving as mediators. Additional differences include the procedures for conducting mediation, the authority of mediators, and the mechanisms for ratifying mediation results that hold the force of law in both countries. Despite the fundamental differences in their systems, both countries share the same goal of achieving a fair resolution beneficial to both parties. Cultural factors, legal systems, and court structures are essential elements influencing these differences and similarities. This research provides important insights for the development of mediation practices in Indonesia by considering the implementation of a more flexible system similar to Japan’s.
Co-Authors Panji Riyadi Purnomo Purnomo Royan Siagian Sudiyanto Sudiyanto Sugiarto Sugiarto Zainal Arifin Hosein