Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.983
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Yuridis KRTHA BHAYANGKARA ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum Jurnal Sosial dan Teknologi
Ramadhan, Muhammad Rizqi Alfarizi
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Engineering Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 5 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 5 Documents
Search

 1 
Fulfillment of Simple Proof Requirements on Bankruptcy Application Based on Sema Number 03 of 2023 Widhayaka, Unggul Wibawa; Retnaningsih, Sonyendah; Ramadhan, Muhammad Rizqi Alfarizi
KRTHA BHAYANGKARA Vol. 19 No. 1 (2025): KRTHA BHAYANGKARA: APRIL 2025
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/krtha.v19i1.3784

Abstract

The Supreme Court has issued Circular Letter Number (SEMA) 3 of 2023 which stipulates that simple proof cannot be applied in bankruptcy against apartment and/or flat developers. The circular is predicted to protect consumer interests and eliminate legal remedies in the form of bankruptcy applications to the commercial court, so that they must be submitted as lawsuits to the district court. The circular is not in accordance with the principle of integration in Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (KPKPU Law). The KPKPU Law has clearly defined the matter of simple proof, and does not provide special protection for apartment and/or flat developers. Normative research is carried out with doctrinal research and tests the level of synchronization of regulations. The research is evaluative, examining cases that have occurred, based on comparative law. From this study it is concluded that proof is categorized as simple if there is a debt that is due and unpaid and there are two or more creditors. The requirement for simple proof does not consider the complexity of its impact on consumers. SEMA is a policy regulation, so if it conflicts with the regulations above it, the principle of lex superior derogat legi inferiori will apply. SEMA 03 of 2023 cannot change the provisions of the law, so simple proof can still be implemented against apartment developers. SEMA 03 of 2023 is not in line with the KPKPU Law so that by law it should be cancelled.
PERTIMBANGAN HUKUM DALAM PERKARA BANTAHAN (DERDEN VERZET) ATAS SENGKETA TANAH MENURUT SURAT EDARAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 3 TAHUN 2018 Retnaningsih, Sonyendah; Suherman; Setyono, Yoni Agus; Ramadhan, Muhammad Rizqi Alfarizi
Jurnal Yuridis Vol 11 No 1 (2024): Jurnal Yuridis
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/jyur.v11i1.7743

Abstract

Derden Verzet adalah upaya hukum luar biasa untuk melawan keputusan hakim yang merugikan seseorang. Perlawanan pihak ketiga diatur dalam Pasal 195 ayat (6) dan (7) HIR, atau Pasal 206 ayat (6) RBG. Pasal 195 ayat (6) HIR. Perlawanan pihak ketiga terhadap penyitaan eksekutorial hanya dapat dilakukan setelah ada putusan yang memiliki kekuatan hukum tetap. Pada prinsipnya, perlawanan yang diajukan oleh pihak ketiga terhadap penyitaan eksekutorial tidak menghentikan eksekusi. Dalam hal ini, pihak ketiga harus dapat membuktikan bahwa dia adalah pemilik dari barang yang disita. Selain itu, penentang harus benar-benar memiliki kepentingan untuk meminta pengangkatan penyitaan eksekusi tersebut karena telah merugikan haknya. Jika pihak ketiga dapat membuktikan bahwa barang tersebut adalah miliknya dan bukan milik tergugat, maka penentang harus diakui sebagai penentang yang jujur, dan perintah penyitaan harus dicabut. Dengan demikian, putusan mengenai perlawanan pihak ketiga terhadap penyitaan eksekusi hanya berhubungan dengan pencabutan penyitaan eksekusi atas barang milik pihak ketiga dan tidak memutuskan hak kepemilikan tanah. Namun, dalam prakteknya, terdapat keputusan-keputusan mengenai Derden Verzet yang memutuskan mengenai kepemilikan hak atas tanah yang dipersengketakan. Hal ini menimbulkan masalah hukum dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi karena bantahan atau perlawanan pihak ketiga terhadap keputusan eksekusi hanya berhubungan dengan pencabutan penyitaan eksekusi atas barang milik pihak ketiga.
Implikasi Pelaksanaan Undang-Undang Nomor 27 Tahun 2022 Tentang Perlindungan Data Pribadi terhadap Isu Dokumen Terbang pada Sektor Pertambangan Ramadhan, Muhammad Rizqi Alfarizi
Jurnal Sosial Teknologi Vol. 5 No. 11 (2025): Jurnal Sosial dan Teknologi
Publisher : CV. Green Publisher Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59188/jurnalsostech.v5i11.32506

Abstract

Fenomena “dokumen terbang”, yakni praktik peredaran, jual-beli, dan penyalahgunaan izin usaha pertambangan secara melawan hukum dengan memanfaatkan penyalahgunaan data pribadi atau data korporasi, telah menimbulkan distorsi yang serius dalam tata Kelola sektor pertambangan di Indonesia. Praktik ini umumnya melibatkan pemalsuan data persuhaan, penggunaan data pribadi tanpa izin, serta penerbitan izin fiktif untuk melegalkan kegiatan tambang ilegal. Pemberlakuan Undang-Undang Nomor 27 Tahun 2022 tentang Perlindungan Data Pribadi (UU PDP) memberikan landasan hukum baru untuk menjerat pelaku yang memperoleh atau menggunakan data pribadi orang lain dalam aktivitas perizinan secara tidak sah. Namun, penegakannya masih lemah karena integrasi antara UU PDP dan Undang-Undang (UU Minerba) beserta peraturan turunannya belum optimal. Melalui pendekatan yuridis-normatif, artikel ini menganalisis bagaimana penyalahgunaan data pribadi dalam jual-beli izin tambang yang melanggar ketentuan Pasal 65-68 UU PDP (tentang pemalsuan dan pengunaan data pribadi secara tidak sah), Pasal 159 dan 161A UU Minerba (tentang laporan palsu serta pengalihan izin tanpa izin pemerintah), dan Pasal 263 KUHP (tentang pemalsuan surat). Temuan penelitian ini menegaskan bahwa penerapan UU PDP perlu disinergikan dengan tata cara perizinan pertambangan (OSS-MODI) guna menjamin integritas data, mencegah korupsi, mencegah penyalahgunaan data pribadi, serta melindungi hak digital dan ekonomi warga negara dalam sektor pertambangan.
Perlindungan Hukum Jamu Tradisional sebagai Kekayaan Intelektual Komunal di Indonesia Kurdi, Kurdi; Ramadhan, Muhammad Rizqi Alfarizi; Kadir, Abd; Haqkiki, Muhammad Iqdam; Nusantara, Khairul Umam Ganda
ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum Vol 8, No 1 (2026): ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum Mei
Publisher : Universitas Medan Area

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31289/arbiter.v8i1.6975

Abstract

Traditional herbal medicine (jamu) represents a form of traditional cultural expression (TCE) and communal intellectual property (CIP) passed down through generations, carrying cultural, health, and economic significance. However, Indonesia’s current legal system does not provide adequate protection for jamu as a collective cultural product, as it remains based on individual intellectual property models. This research aims to analyze weaknesses in national regulations, assess the relevance of international instruments such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Nagoya Protocol, and UNESCO 2003, and propose a regulatory reconstruction model that is more comprehensive and contextual. The method used is normative juridical with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Findings show the urgency for a specific law to regulate legal protection of TCEs and CIP, along with the integration of international principles like prior informed consent and benefit sharing into national law. Therefore, the protection of jamu as intangible cultural heritage can be more just, sustainable, and community-centered.
Letters of Demand in Civil Disputes: Comparative Jurisprudence Between Indonesia and Malaysia Retnaningsih, Sonyendah; Ramadhan, Muhammad Rizqi Alfarizi
KRTHA BHAYANGKARA Vol. 20 No. 1 (2026): KRTHA BHAYANGKARA: APRIL 2026
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta Raya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31599/krtha.v20i1.5224

Abstract

A letter of demand (sommatie) is a formal interpellation addressing a party’s non-performance. In Indonesia, a significant juridical paradox exists: while Article 1238 of the Civil Code mandates a formal warrant, Supreme Court Decision No. 117 K/SIP/1956 renders it discretionary, often resulting in premature litigation. Conversely, Malaysian jurisprudence formalizes the Letter of Demand (LOD) as a mandatory pre-action protocol and a material manifestation of bona fides. Utilizing a doctrinal and qualitative methodology, this study evaluates the functional role of these instruments within both jurisdictions. The results indicate that the discretionary nature of the Indonesian sommatie undermines judicial efficiency. To strengthen scholarly contribution, this study proposes a procedural harmonization model advocating for mandatory pre-action protocols in Indonesia. This paradigm shift reinterprets the sommatie as a vital Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) instrument rather than a mere procedural trigger, effectively filtering out unnecessary litigation and upholding the principle of swift, simple, and cost-effective justice.
Co-Authors Abd Kadir, Abd Haqkiki, Muhammad Iqdam Kurdi Kurdi Nusantara, Khairul Umam Ganda Setyono, Yoni Agus Sonyendah Retnaningsih, Sonyendah Suherman Widhayaka, Unggul Wibawa