Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Madani Legal Review Fox Justi : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum AT-TAKLIM: Jurnal Pendidikan Multidisiplin
Yusuf M. Said
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Analisis Hukum Dan Etika Profesi Hakim Mengenai Kasus Hakim Ronald Tannur Studi Putusan Nomor 454/PID.B/2024/PN.SBY Arenza Wahyu; Yusuf M. Said
AT-TAKLIM: Jurnal Pendidikan Multidisiplin Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): At-Taklim: Jurnal Pendidikan Multidisiplin (Edisi April)
Publisher : PT. Hasba Edukasi Mandiri

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.71282/at-taklim.v2i4.229

Abstract

The judiciary as a symbol of the rule of law and the last bastion of justice should be impartial, and providing equal legal treatment is the desire of all levels of society This research analyzes the legal basis of decision Number 454/Pid.B/2024/PN. Sby and revealed the actions of the judge corruption case. The method used is a normative juridical approach, analyzing regulations and literature related to the perspective of Judge Professional Ethics which are the basic principles that guide the behavior of judges. The results show that there is a strong indication that the person concerned has violated the code of ethics of the judge profession as stipulated in the Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct for Judges (KEPPH). In conclusion, this policy needs to be adjusted to legal principles in terms of legal certainty, justice and utility. Its recommendations include stricter oversight to restore public confidence in the justice system and ensure that every judge's decision truly reflects justice and legal certainty.
Errors in Purchasing Land Rights Which Result in Criminal Liability (Case Study of the Application of Article 385 Paragraph 1 of the KUHP in Cases of Land Grabbing) Murdipin Hadi; Yusuf M. Said
Fox Justi : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol. 15 No. 03 (2025): Fox justi : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Edition 2025
Publisher : SEAN Institute

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

Abstract

Basically, the difference in court decisions in land grabbing cases is a problem related to the fulfillment of the elements of the crime in Article 385 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code that can be criminally accounted for. The fulfillment of the elements of the crime in question certainly has a correlation with the determination of the defendant which is the consideration of the Panel of Judges in the case. Therefore, in this study there are problems, namely: 1. Can the act of purchasing land rights be categorized as an error that can be criminally accounted for? 2. How is the legal consideration of the Panel of Judges in applying Article 385 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code that can cause differences in criminal decisions in land grabbing cases viewed from the theory of legal certainty? The research method used is a normative juridical research that will examine court decisions regarding land grabbing cases that have permanent legal force. The court decision will be examined based on the legal provisions contained in the Old Criminal Code. The results of the study conclude that: 1. Actions that can be categorized as criminal acts, namely: a. Actions intended to benefit oneself or others unlawfully; b. Selling, exchanging, or encumbering with a right to land, a building, structure, planting, or seeding. Meanwhile, the aspect of error in criminal acts in the crime of land grabbing as regulated in Article 385 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code relates to "even though it is known that the one who has or also has rights to it is another person". 2. There are different views from the Panel of Judges in the decision of the crime of land grabbing as regulated in Article 385 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code in the Decision of the Palangkaraya District Court Number: 53 / Pid.B / 2018 / PN.Plk dated May 7, 2018, which emphasizes more on the legal position of the Defendant as a land buyer, while in the Decision of the Supreme Court Number: 683 K / PID / 2018.
Pemidanaan Integratif Berdasarkan Ketentuan Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika Pradana, Elga; Yusuf M. Said
Madani Legal Review Vol. 9 No. 2 (2025): Madani Legal Review
Publisher : FAKULTAS HUKUM UM PAREPARE

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31850/malrev.v9i2.4112

Abstract

Pemidanaan terhadap pelaku tindak pidana narkotika di Indonesia tidak hanya bertujuan untuk memberikan efek jera, tetapi juga untuk merehabilitasi pengguna agar tidak kembali melakukan pelanggaran hukum. Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika mengatur pendekatan pemidanaan yang bersifat integratif, yaitu perpaduan antara pendekatan represif (hukuman pidana) dan pendekatan restoratif (rehabilitasi medis dan sosial). Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis efektivitas penerapan pemidanaan integratif dalam upaya penanggulangan tindak pidana narkotika, khususnya bagi pecandu dan korban penyalahgunaan narkotika. Metode yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa meskipun secara normatif Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 memberikan ruang untuk rehabilitasi sebagai bagian dari pemidanaan, dalam praktiknya masih terdapat hambatan, seperti minimnya koordinasi antar lembaga penegak hukum, keterbatasan fasilitas rehabilitasi, serta paradigma penegakan hukum yang masih dominan menekankan pemidanaan penjara. Selain itu, peran hakim dalam menjatuhkan vonis rehabilitasi belum konsisten, sehingga penerapan pemidanaan integratif menjadi tidak merata. Kesimpulannya, efektivitas pemidanaan integratif masih terbatas dan memerlukan perbaikan dalam aspek implementasi hukum, sinergi antarlembaga, dan edukasi bagi aparat penegak hukum. Reformasi kebijakan dan penguatan pendekatan rehabilitatif sangat penting untuk mengoptimalkan fungsi hukum pidana dalam penanganan kejahatan narkotika
Co-Authors Arenza Wahyu Murdipin Hadi Pradana, Elga