Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.961
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Awang Long Law Review Collegium Studiosum Journal Journal of Social Research Sanskara Hukum dan HAM Jurnal Hukum dan HAM Wara Sains
Atmadja, Wilhelmina Setia
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Computer Science & IT Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 6 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 6 Documents
Search

 1 
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR UNHYGIENIC PRACTICES AT SEC BOWL RESTAURANT Anshari, Abu Thalhah Al; Ratrisasi, Elizabeth Prima; Dewani, Maheswari Queena; Januarita, Shintia; Atmadja, Wilhelmina Setia
Awang Long Law Review Vol. 7 No. 2 (2025): Awang Long Law Review
Publisher : Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Awang Long

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56301/awl.v7i2.1536

Abstract

One of the restaurants that announced the permanent closure of its restaurant branch in Kuningan Jakarta is the Sec Bowl restaurant. The Sec Bowl restaurant is allegedly permanently closed because of a video influencer named Codeblu. Real name William Anderson, he is known as a restaurant and food reviewer who has 14 million followers on TikTok. The content he often uploads is criticism or praise in the form of photos or videos of the food he has tried. Codeblu made a reaction video to a photo sent to him, which showed the condition of the toilet at Sec Bowl. In his video, the influencer said that the place was "very unhygienic" and "very inhumane". Codeblu also suspected that the rice bowl restaurant had violated many ethics and laws. This is certainly very detrimental to consumers. The video has received 62.4 thousand likes and has been shared 15.2 thousand times. The problem is how is the legal regulation of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) to prevent unhygienic practices in restaurants? What is the legal accountability for unhygienic practices at the Sec Bowl restaurant? The research method used is normative juridical. The results of the study are legal regulations on Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) to prevent unhygienic practices in restaurants that in the case of the Sec Bowl restaurant does not have a Certificate of Hygiene Sanitation (LHS) as per the Regulation of the Minister of Health Number 2 of 2023 page 62 Number 6 point F and legal liability for unhygienic practices at the Sec Bowl restaurant, namely negligence tort liability. In addition, liability for unhygienic practices at the Sec Bowl restaurant can be in the form of compensation if a consumer experiences health problems caused by food from the restaurant.
Fault-Based Liability Vs. Strict Liability: Comparative Study of the Concept of Unlawful Acts Indonesia – Japan Atmadja, Wilhelmina Setia; Datadavie Ginting, Gavra; Queena Dewani, Maheswari; Wijaya, Jason Marvin; Satyawada Pattiwael , Rastra Judea; Demonggreng, Yudhiran R. V. M.
Journal of Social Research Vol. 4 No. 11 (2025): Journal of Social Research
Publisher : International Journal Labs

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55324/josr.v4i10.2825

Abstract

This research analyzes the comparative concepts of fault-based liability and strict liability in torts under Indonesian and Japanese civil law. Although both jurisdictions adopt the European-Continental legal system, the approaches to liability reflect different historical, political, and social contexts. The research employs a normative (doctrinal) juridical approach, supported by secondary legal materials. Findings show that fault-based liability, as codified under Article 1365 of the Civil Code and Article 700 of the Civil Code of Japan, remains the general principle in determining liability, placing the burden of proof on plaintiffs. However, strict liability has emerged in special laws, particularly in consumer protection and environmental law. Landmark cases such as PT Newmont Minahasa Raya in Indonesia and the Minamata case in Japan illustrate the challenges and transitions between these two liability regimes. The study concludes that a balanced dual approach is necessary. Fault-based liability ensures legal certainty and fairness for defendants, while strict liability strengthens victim protection and deterrence. Ultimately, harmonizing both principles enhances access to justice, accommodates social needs, and aligns with global legal trends.
Sita Jaminan Dalam Penerapan Tata Laksana Hukum Acara Perdata Al Anshari, Abu Thalhah; Sibarani, Clarisa Sondang; Ratrisari, Elizabeth Prima; Dewani, Maheswari Queena; Napitu, Olivia Panjiani; Januarita, Shintia; Prabowo, Tri Widyasto; Hutahaean, Triani Cahya; Atmadja, Wilhelmina Setia; Ginting, Yuni Priskila
Jurnal Hukum dan HAM Wara Sains Vol 4 No 01 (2025): Jurnal Hukum dan HAM Wara Sains
Publisher : Westscience Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58812/jhhws.v4i01.1684

Abstract

Tindakan hukum yang diambil untuk melindungi hak-hak penggugat atas hak tergugat sebelum adanya keputusan pengadilan hubungan antara sita jaminan dan hak asasi manusia (HAM), bertujuan untuk menganalisis dampak sita jaminan terhadap HAM serta mengidentifikasi perlindungan yang diperlukan. Menggunakan metode kualitatif, penelitian ini menemukan bahwa pelaksanaan sita jaminan dapat melanggar hak individu jika tidak dilakukan secara transparan. Hasilnya menunjukkan pentingnya prosedur hukum yang adil untuk menjaga keseimbangan antara kepentingan penggugat dan hak tergugat. Rekomendasi kebijakan diharapkan dapat meningkatkan perlindungan HAM, sehingga praktik sita jaminan di pengadilan lebih menghormati hak-hak individu dan keadilan sosial.
PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA MELALUI PERADILAN TATA USAHA NEGARA TERHADAP PEMBATALAN KONTRAK LUMPSUM SEPIHAK Anshari, Abu Thalhah Al; Dewani, Maheswari Queena; Januarita, Shintia; Atmadja, Wilhelmina Setia
Collegium Studiosum Journal Vol. 8 No. 2 (2025): Collegium Studiosum Journal
Publisher : LPPM STIH Awang Long

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56301/csj.v8i2.2022

Abstract

Another form of potential dispute that wil arise is in the form of a contractual relationship that occurs due to a lump sum contract using a type of construction contract from the government to the private sector. This form can be seen from the inequality of the parties' positions. In practice, "lump sum contracts are often interpreted freely, causing misperceptions between Service Users and Service Providers, such as the words "fixed price" and the sentence "all risks are borne by the service provider". The free perception of "fixed price" means that the price may not be changed at all, no matter what happens. While the perception of the sentence "all risks are borne by the service provider" is wildly interpreted that all risks, including changes at the request of the Service User or due to changes in design, are the full responsibility of the Service Provider. "This can trigger an inequality of justice where in practice the things mentioned above can happen at any time, so the contractor (private) sometimes does not get the fulfillment of the rights to the achievements that have been agreed upon through the contract. The research method used is a normative type of research. The research technique is carried out by adjusting it to the established research approach. For research with the aim of drawing legal principles in a law. The competence of the State Administrative Court as a litigation dispute resolution mechanism for the parties to the case, has the authority to adjudicate administrative disputes included in the object of the State Administrative Decision in this case the form of government action in unilaterally canceling the contract through a state administrative decision issued by an authorized official and has a detrimental impact on the contractor or individual/private legal entity.
Kedudukan Alat Bukti dalam Sengketa Hubungan Industrial Anshari, Abu Thalhah Al; Januarita, Shintia; Dewani, Maheswari Queena; Wijaya, Jason Marvin; Atmadja, Wilhelmina Setia
Sanskara Hukum dan HAM Vol. 4 No. 02 (2025): Sanskara Hukum dan HAM (SHH)
Publisher : Eastasouth Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58812/shh.v4i02.697

Abstract

Sistem pembuktian dalam sengketa ketenagakerjaan memiliki peranan penting dalam mewujudkan keadilan dan keseimbangan antara pekerja dan pengusaha. Pembuktian menjadi instrumen utama bagi hakim dalam menentukan kebenaran suatu peristiwa hukum, sehingga keberadaan alat bukti yang sah, valid, dan relevan menjadi kunci dalam proses peradilan hubungan industrial. Tujuan Penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana hukum pembuktian diterapkan dalam sengketa ketenagakerjaan?, dan utnuk mengetahui bagaimana upaya yang dapat dilakukan untuk mewujudkan sistem pembuktian yang menjamin keadilan bagi pekerja maupun pengusaha. Adapun metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual. Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan terhadap literatur hukum, peraturan perundang-undangan, serta putusan pengadilan yang relevan dengan pembuktian dalam sengketa ketenagakerjaan. Analisis dilakukan secara deskriptif kualitatif untuk menggambarkan penerapan hukum pembuktian dalam praktik peradilan hubungan industrial. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sistem pembuktian dalam sengketa ketenagakerjaan masih menghadapi kendala, terutama terkait pengakuan bukti elektronik dan dokumen yang belum dilegalisasi. Untuk mewujudkan keadilan, diperlukan pembaruan regulasi mengenai pembuktian elektronik, peningkatan kompetensi hakim dalam menilai bukti digital, serta penerapan sistem E-Court guna mendukung transparansi dan efisiensi peradilan. Selain itu, penerapan prinsip equality of arms sangat penting agar pekerja dan pengusaha memiliki kesempatan yang seimbang dalam proses pembuktian. Dengan demikian, sistem pembuktian yang ideal diharapkan mampu menegakkan keadilan substantif dan menciptakan hubungan industrial yang harmonis.
Kekuatan Pembuktian Rekaman Elektronik sebagai Kesaksian dalam Perspektif Hukum Pidana Indonesia Anshari, Abu Thalhah Al; Januarita, Shintia; Dewani, Maheswari Queena; Wijaya, Jason Marvin; Atmadja, Wilhelmina Setia; Ginting, Yuni Priskila
Sanskara Hukum dan HAM Vol. 4 No. 02 (2025): Sanskara Hukum dan HAM (SHH)
Publisher : Eastasouth Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58812/shh.v4i02.698

Abstract

Perkembangan teknologi digital telah membawa perubahan signifikan dalam sistem pembuktian hukum pidana di Indonesia. Salah satu isu yang mencuat adalah penggunaan rekaman elektronik sebagai alat bukti dalam persidangan, sebagaimana terlihat dalam perkara Nikita Mirzani vs dr. Reza Gladys tahun 2025. Dalam kasus ini, pihak terdakwa berupaya menampilkan rekaman suara sebagai bukti pendukung, namun ditolak oleh majelis hakim dengan alasan belum terpenuhinya syarat formil dan verifikasi keaslian bukti. Penolakan tersebut menimbulkan perdebatan yuridis mengenai batas kewenangan hakim dalam menilai kelayakan alat bukti elektronik serta sejauh mana prinsip fair trial dan hak pembelaan terdakwa dijunjung dalam proses peradilan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan yang relevan, putusan pengadilan, serta literatur hukum terkait pembuktian elektronik. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa secara yuridis, sikap hakim yang menolak pemutaran rekaman dapat dibenarkan dari sisi prosedural untuk menjaga tertib persidangan dan memastikan keabsahan bukti. Namun, dari perspektif keadilan substantif, keputusan tersebut menimbulkan dilema karena berpotensi membatasi hak terdakwa dalam pembelaan diri. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa keseimbangan antara prinsip due process of law dan fair trial harus menjadi dasar dalam menilai kekuatan pembuktian rekaman elektronik. Dengan demikian, hukum pidana Indonesia perlu terus beradaptasi terhadap perkembangan teknologi agar tetap mampu menjamin keadilan, kepastian hukum, dan perlindungan hak asasi manusia di era digital.
Co-Authors Al Anshari, Abu Thalhah Anshari, Abu Thalhah Al Datadavie Ginting, Gavra Demonggreng, Yudhiran R. V. M. Dewani, Maheswari Queena Hutahaean, Triani Cahya Januarita, Shintia Napitu, Olivia Panjiani Prabowo, Tri Widyasto Queena Dewani, Maheswari Ratrisari, Elizabeth Prima Ratrisasi, Elizabeth Prima Satyawada Pattiwael , Rastra Judea Sibarani, Clarisa Sondang Wijaya, Jason Marvin Yuni Priskila Ginting