Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
1.873
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Al-Mutsla: Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Keislaman dan Kemasyarakatan Ius Poenale Kartika: Jurnal Studi Keislaman Causa: Jurnal Hukum dan Kewarganegaraan Indonesian Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence, Economic and Legal Theory Interdisciplinary Explorations in Research Journal (IERJ) Postmodernism
Kholik, Muhamad Abdul
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

Published : 12 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search
Journal : Interdisciplinary Explorations in Research Journal (IERJ)

 1 
Dilema Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Pejabat Negara dalam Negara Hukum Demokratis Kholik, Muhamad Abdul; Zulfaidah, Rena; Septiani, Ernida
Interdisciplinary Explorations in Research Journal Vol. 3 No. 3 (2025)
Publisher : PT. Sharia Journal and Education Center

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62976/ierj.v3i3.1707

Abstract

This article aims to analyze the dilemma of criminal liability of public officials within the framework of a democratic rule of law, particularly concerning the phenomenon of criminalization of public policies in Indonesia. The main issues examined include the conceptual boundaries between policy errors and criminal acts, the problems in applying criminal law to public policies, and the formulation of an ideal and just model of criminal liability for public officials. This research employs a normative juridical method with conceptual, statutory, and case approaches by analyzing the New Indonesian Criminal Code, relevant regulations, and legal doctrines in criminal and administrative law. The results show that criminal prosecution of public officials is often conducted without clear parameters, leading to fear in decision-making and hindering bureaucratic innovation. It is found that state financial loss alone cannot automatically serve as a basis for criminal liability without proof of fault, abuse of authority, and malicious intent. The study emphasizes the importance of separating legal regimes between administrative, civil, and criminal law by placing criminal law as ultimum remedium. The ideal model proposed is a criminal liability system based on constitutional parameters that require proof of mens rea, intentional abuse of authority, and personal benefit. The study concludes that law enforcement against public officials must be carried out proportionally and fairly to prevent the criminalization of policies while still ensuring accountability for officials who genuinely commit criminal acts.
Konstitusionalitas Penerapan Sanksi Pidana terhadap Kebijakan Publik yang Berimplikasi Pidana Kholik, Muhamad Abdul; Zulfaidah, Rena; Hakim, Subqi Muhammad Fadhilah
Interdisciplinary Explorations in Research Journal Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : PT. Sharia Journal and Education Center

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62976/ierj.v4i1.1709

Abstract

This study examines the constitutionality of imposing criminal sanctions on public policies that have criminal implications. The research is motivated by the increasing phenomenon of policy criminalization, which has created legal uncertainty for public officials in performing governmental duties. The objectives of this study are to analyze the constitutional limits of criminal liability in public policy, to identify the legal problems arising from the criminalization of policy, and to formulate an ideal model for the application of criminal sanctions in accordance with the principles of the rule of law. This research employs a normative legal method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Legal materials were analyzed qualitatively through library research involving legislation, legal doctrines, and relevant court decisions. The findings reveal that not every public policy resulting in loss can be criminalized, but must meet constitutional parameters such as the existence of mens rea, abuse of authority, real and measurable loss, and clear violation of law. The practice of criminalizing public policy generates various problems, including over-criminalization, chilling effects on decision-making, and conflicts between administrative discretion and criminal law enforcement. This study concludes that the application of criminal sanctions to public policy must be positioned as ultimum remedium through the synchronization of administrative law, constitutional law, and criminal law. The proposed ideal model emphasizes the prioritization of administrative sanctions and the formulation of clear legal parameters to ensure that law enforcement remains constitutional, proportional, and supportive of effective governance.
Co-Authors Ade Maulana Alifi, Adif Azazy, Yusup Hakim, Subqi Muhammad Fadhilah Hermawan, Muhammad Zalfa Azmi Najmudin, Deden Rajak, Rahmat Romadhoni, Kholid Rosidin, Utang Sanmas, Abu Septiani, Ernida Sulastri, Dewi Zulfaidah, Rena