Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.702
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis Cerdika: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia Journal of Strafvodering Indonesian
Wibowo, Mustofa Ponco
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Health Professions Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences Other

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

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
Corporate Criminal Responsibility in Environmental Crimes: a Case Study of Industrial Pollution Dewi, Kemmala; Musahib, Abd Razak; Wibowo, Mustofa Ponco
Journal of Strafvordering Indonesian Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): JOSI - MARCH
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/wp2z3b67

Abstract

Criminal law enforcement against companies in environmental crime cases still faces significant challenges. Although Law Number 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management (PPLH Law) has regulated criminal sanctions for companies that pollute the environment, its implementation is still weak. The main factors that hinder the effectiveness of law enforcement include difficulties in proving criminal elements, weak capacity of law enforcement officials, and political and economic pressures that benefit polluting companies. In addition, corruption, overlapping authority between institutions, and inequality between regulations and implementation are the main obstacles in criminally ensnaring companies. The principles of strict liability and corporate criminal liability that are expected to ensnare polluting companies are still not applied optimally. Legal reform is needed to strengthen the effectiveness of environmental criminal law enforcement, including through increasing the capacity of law enforcement officers, improving regulations, and implementing stricter sanctions such as the revocation of business licenses. Information transparency, inter-agency coordination, and protection for whistleblowers must also be strengthened. With these steps, it is hoped that environmental law enforcement can be more effective in providing a deterrent effect to polluting companies, ensuring corporate criminal responsibility, and upholding the principles of environmental justice in Indonesia.
Jurisdictional Analysis of the Authority of the Fisheries Court to Try Corruption Crimes in the Fisheries Sector Ramadhan, Azis Akbar; Wibowo, Mustofa Ponco
Cerdika: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia Vol. 5 No. 7 (2025): Cerdika: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia
Publisher : Publikasi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59141/cerdika.v5i7.2673

Abstract

This research addresses the legal ambiguity in determining jurisdiction over corruption crimes committed within Indonesia’s fisheries sector. Globally, both corruption and illegal fishing represent complex transnational crimes that demand clear legal enforcement. In Indonesia, two distinct legal frameworks intersect in such cases: the Fisheries Court established under Law No. 45 of 2009 and the Corruption Court under Law No. 46 of 2009. This study aims to analyze the jurisdictional conflict that arises when an act of corruption occurs in the fisheries sector, potentially falling under both courts’ authority. Using a normative juridical method, the research applies a statutory and conceptual approach by examining relevant laws, court decisions, and legal doctrines. The findings reveal that despite the dual specificity of laws, corruption crimes—even when committed in the fisheries sector—fall under the jurisdiction of the Corruption Court based on the principle of lex specialis systematica. This principle prioritizes legal norms that are systematically more specific in handling a particular offense. The study contributes to legal scholarship by clarifying the hierarchy and interaction of overlapping special laws in Indonesia’s legal system and provides practical implications for law enforcement agencies and the judiciary to avoid conflict of competence. Future research may explore comparative models in other legal systems for resolving similar jurisdictional overlaps.
Urgensi dan Tata Kelola Super Holding BUMN: Studi Komparatif Danantara Indonesia, Temasek Holdings Singapura, dan 1MDB Malaysia Yustisia Kartika, Nidia; Prasetyo, Muhammad Bilal; Wibowo, Mustofa Ponco
Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis Vol 6 No 8 (2025): Tema Hukum Pemerintahan
Publisher : CV Rewang Rencang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56370/jhlg.v6i8.1584

Abstract

This study aims to compare the governance between Danantara, Temasek, and 1MDB. The focus on the study includes legal basis, ownership status, organizational structure, and accountability system. Danantara has a strong legal basis but remains vulnerable to political influence and weak oversight. Temasek has maintained its independence through a strong legal and organizational structure, while 1MDB exemplifies governance failure due to weak oversight and lack of transparency. This study highlights the need for transparency, accountability, and political neutrality to ensure the success of state-owned superholdings and offers insights for developing a sustainable state investment model.
Jurisdictional Analysis of the Authority of the Fisheries Court to Try Corruption Crimes in the Fisheries Sector Ramadhan, Azis Akbar; Wibowo, Mustofa Ponco
Cerdika: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia Vol. 5 No. 7 (2025): Cerdika: Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia
Publisher : Publikasi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59141/cerdika.v5i7.2673

Abstract

This research addresses the legal ambiguity in determining jurisdiction over corruption crimes committed within Indonesia’s fisheries sector. Globally, both corruption and illegal fishing represent complex transnational crimes that demand clear legal enforcement. In Indonesia, two distinct legal frameworks intersect in such cases: the Fisheries Court established under Law No. 45 of 2009 and the Corruption Court under Law No. 46 of 2009. This study aims to analyze the jurisdictional conflict that arises when an act of corruption occurs in the fisheries sector, potentially falling under both courts’ authority. Using a normative juridical method, the research applies a statutory and conceptual approach by examining relevant laws, court decisions, and legal doctrines. The findings reveal that despite the dual specificity of laws, corruption crimes—even when committed in the fisheries sector—fall under the jurisdiction of the Corruption Court based on the principle of lex specialis systematica. This principle prioritizes legal norms that are systematically more specific in handling a particular offense. The study contributes to legal scholarship by clarifying the hierarchy and interaction of overlapping special laws in Indonesia’s legal system and provides practical implications for law enforcement agencies and the judiciary to avoid conflict of competence. Future research may explore comparative models in other legal systems for resolving similar jurisdictional overlaps.
Co-Authors Kemmala Dewi Musahib, Abd Razak Prasetyo, Muhammad Bilal Ramadhan, Azis Akbar Yustisia Kartika, Nidia