Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Litigasi Amsir
Herman B
Fakultas Hukum Institut Ilmu Sosial dan Bisnis Andi Sapada
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Melampaui Retribusi: Restorative Justice untuk Pemulihan Aset Negara dari Korupsi Andi Fahrul; Nasrul Nasrul; Firmansyah Hibbu; Phireri Phireri; Herman B
Jurnal Litigasi Amsir Vol 13 No 2 (2026): Februari
Publisher : Faculty of Law Andi Sapada Institute of Social Sciences and Business

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study aims to determine and analyze the significance of the application of the concept of restorative justice in corruption cases and the model for applying the concept of restorative justice in corruption cases. This research uses a normative empirical research method with a legal and social approach. Primary and secondary data sources are used. Data analysis will be conducted using observational-sensory and theoretical-rational methods, employing a reasoning model that first utilizes inductive logic and then continues with deductive logic. The results of this study are The significance of restorative justice is its potential to recover state losses and create more substantive accountability, but it can only be applied to certain corruption cases that meet strict requirements, such as small losses and no wide impact, so as not to erode the deterrent effect and substantive justice, The retributive justice paradigm which is the legal basis for eradicating corruption is not relevant to the main objective of corruption eradication law in Indonesia. The spirit to save state assets must be based on restorative justice thinking that is oriented towards recovery from the consequences of corruption rather than focusing on imprisoning perpetrators of corruption and The concept of restorative justice in the punishment of perpetrators of corruption can be implemented in the form of strengthening the norms of returning state losses from additional punishment to the main punishment and The model for implementing the restorative justice concept in corruption cases must be supported by strong regulations and strict oversight to ensure the goal of recovering state losses is achieved without sacrificing the principle of justice. Therefore, the model for implementing restorative justice at the police level is based on Police Regulation No. 08 of 2021 concerning Handling Criminal Acts Based on Restorative Justice. Restorative justice is an effort hoped for by the public who desire reparation for losses suffered as a result of criminal acts. Public participation in resolving cases using a restorative justice approach can also increase public awareness of the law, thus also serving to prevent crime.
Penipuan Berlanjut dalam Perspektif Penegakan Hukum: Menakar Pertanggungjawaban Pidana dan Pertimbangan Hakim Ulfa Safitri; Muh. Fadli Faisal Rasyid; Herman B; Muh. Akbar Fhad Syahril; Tegar Bimantoro
Jurnal Litigasi Amsir Vol 13 No 3 (2026): Mei
Publisher : Faculty of Law Andi Sapada Institute of Social Sciences and Business

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study aims to analyze how substantive criminal law was applied to the crime of continuing fraud in Judgment No. 181/Pid.B/2025/PN Pin and the legal reasoning of the panel of judges in rendering their decision on the crime of continuing fraud in Judgment No. 181/Pid.B/2025/PN Pin. Using a normative research method, the findings of the study indicate that the application of substantive criminal law in Judgment No. 181/Pid.B/2025/PN Pin was in accordance with Article 378 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 64(1) of the Criminal Code. The Panel of Judges successfully established all elements of the continuing offense of fraud based on the facts presented at trial and admissible evidence in accordance with Articles 183 and 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The application of the concept of a continuing offense (voortgezette handeling) was also appropriate because the defendant’s acts were committed with a single intent, using the same modus operandi, against the same victim, and within a short span of time. The Panel of Judges’ legal reasoning has satisfied both legal and non-legal aspects. From a legal standpoint, the verdict is based on the proof of the elements of the criminal offense and the application of legal provisions consistent with the theories of proof and criminal liability. From a non-legal standpoint, the Panel of Judges considered the aggravating and mitigating circumstances of the defendant as well as the purpose of criminal punishment, ensuring that the verdict reflects legal certainty, justice, and public interest.
Kepastian Hukum dan Perlindungan Hak dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Penguasaan Tanah di Indonesia Rini Febrianti; Kairuddin Kairuddin; Muh. Akbar Fhad Syahril; Herman B; Andi Heridah
Jurnal Litigasi Amsir Vol 13 No 4 (2026): Agustus
Publisher : Faculty of Law Andi Sapada Institute of Social Sciences and Business

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Land disputes in Indonesia require a clear distinction between ownership rights, the state’s authority to control land, and physical possession, as each entails different legal consequences. This study examines these distinctions and their implications for evidence assessment and land dispute resolution. It employs a normative legal method using statutory and conceptual approaches, supplemented by a review of case-related literature. Primary and secondary legal materials were collected through library research and analysed qualitatively through grammatical and systematic interpretation. The findings indicate that ownership rights confer legally protected powers subject to statutory restrictions and the social function of land, whereas the state’s authority to control land constitutes public regulatory authority rather than private ownership. Physical possession does not automatically establish ownership, but it may have evidentiary significance when the applicable legal requirements are satisfied. Land certificates constitute strong, rather than absolute, evidence and must be assessed alongside the history of acquisition, the correspondence between physical and juridical data, and the legality of administrative procedures. The study concludes that legally sound dispute resolution requires continuity between identifying the legal basis of claims, evaluating evidence, selecting the competent forum, and implementing the resulting settlement or judgment. Its contribution is a normative basis for reconciling legal certainty with rights protection, without claiming to establish the empirical effectiveness of existing mechanisms.
Co-Authors Andi Fahrul Andi Heridah Firmansyah Hibbu Kairuddin Kairuddin Muh. Akbar Fhad Syahril Muh. Fadli Faisal Rasyid Nasrul Nasrul Phireri Phireri Rini Febrianti Tegar Bimantoro Ulfa Safitri