Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Al-Ihkam: Jurnal Hukum dan Pranata Sosial Jurist-Diction Pandecta : Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu Hukum (Research Law Journal)
R.B. Muhammad Zainal Abidin
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Urgency of Falsum in Indonesian Criminal Justice System as Basis for Revision; An Islamic Perspective Mia Amiati; Taufik Rachman; R.B. Muhammad Zainal Abidin
AL-IHKAM: Jurnal Hukum & Pranata Sosial Vol. 19 No. 2 (2024)
Publisher : Faculty of Sharia IAIN Madura collaboration with The Islamic Law Researcher Association (APHI)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19105/al-lhkam.v19i2.13141

Abstract

In Indonesian Islamic law, "falsum" has no direct equivalent. However, this idea matters in legal debates of beliefs, utterances, and behaviors. Falsum corrects final decisions in Germany and the Dutch during Revision. Indonesian prosecutors might request Revision, but the Constitutional Court limited this power to convicts and their descendants, extending unfairness. Revision should remedy bribery, document forgery, conflict of interest, and perjury by using the idea of falsum. However, falsum implementation in Indonesia raises problems about its compatibility with Islamic values. The study investigates how addressing falsum, in accordance with the principles of justice and utility, can lead to fairer legal reforms and bolster public confidence in the judiciary, especially within Indonesia's predominantly Muslim community. It examines the possibilities and drawbacks of legalizing falsum in Indonesia using normative, theoretical, and comparative approaches. It contends that the notion of falsum can provide a persuasive rationale for legal reforms in Indonesia's criminal court system. It also enables law enforcement officials and future drafters of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) to understand the evolution of Revision because granting prosecutors the authority to initiate Revision based on falsum is crucial for ensuring greater justice.
Depenalization of Drug Abuse Criminal Act as a Humanist Criminal Law Policy R.B. Muhammad Zainal Abidin
Jurist-Diction Vol. 7 No. 4 (2024): Volume 7 No. 4, Oktober 2024
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Airlangga

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20473/jd.v7i4.57609

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to analyze and evaluate ratio legis of criminal sanctions against perpetrators of narcotics abuse and policy reformulation of humanist sanction arrangements against narcotics abusers in the future. This research is a legal research that uses statutory and conceptual approaches. The results of study; (1) ratio legis of providing criminal sanctions against narcotics abusers as referred to in Act Number 35 Year 2009 concerning Narcotics is that the formers of the Act still adhere to the retrebutive paradigm. The target of rehabilitation is only limited to victims of drug abuse, not drug abusers; (2) the policy reformulation of sanctions against drug abusers in the future is no longer using criminal law means. The means used are non-penal means that remove criminal sanctions and replace them with rehabilitation measures.
A Double-Edged Sword? Legal Certainty and the Perils of Authority in Indonesia’s Draft Asset Deprivation Act Hisbul Luthfi Ashsyarofi; Arfan Kaimuddin; R.B. Muhammad Zainal Abidin; Bastomi, Ahmad
Pandecta Research Law Journal Vol. 19 No. 2 (2024): December, 2024
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/pandecta.v19i2.2939

Abstract

The urgency of enacting the Draft Asset Deprivation Act in Indonesia stems from the need to recover assets linked to criminal activities, even in the absence of a conviction. This approach is seen as a preventive measure to safeguard illicitly acquired assets; however, its implementation raises serious legal concerns. The potential violation of property rights—recognized as fundamental human rights—poses risks to justice and legal certainty. The lack of clear procedural safeguards could lead to authority abuse, arbitrary asset seizures, and disproportionate impacts on individuals. This study identifies critical inconsistencies within the draft law. First, the phrase "asset deprivation is only carried out once" in the explanation of Article 3 contradicts Article 5(1)(c), which allows additional asset deprivation if previously seized assets are insufficient. This antinomy undermines legal certainty and fairness. Second, Article 56 permits the auctioning of assets before a final court decision without specifying clear conditions for its application. The absence of rigid legal criteria opens avenues for abuse of authority, further exacerbating risks of injustice. The novelty of this research lies in its critical legal analysis of these contradictions and their implications for property rights and procedural fairness. This research contributes to the global discourse on asset deprivation laws by critically examining the tension between crime prevention and fundamental human rights. The study highlights how ambiguities in legal drafting and the absence of clear procedural safeguards can lead to authority abuse, a challenge faced by many jurisdictions implementing non-conviction-based asset forfeiture (NCB) frameworks. By comparing Indonesia’s Draft Asset Deprivation Act with international best practices, this research offers valuable insights into the legal balance between state power and individual rights, which is crucial in developing laws that do not unduly compromise fundamental freedoms.
Co-Authors Arfan Kaimuddin Bastomi, Ahmad Hisbul Luthfi Ashsyarofi Mia Amiati Taufik Rachman