Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) Jurnal Kolaboratif Sains Ganec Swara
Yuni Ristanti
Fakultas Hukum Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik Universitas Mataram
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Humanities Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Health Professions Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Medicine & Pharmacology Nursing Public Health Social Sciences Other

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
The Validity of the Binding Sale and Purchase Agreement (PPJB) in the presence of a Notary related to the incomplete basis of land rights Febrihadi Suparidho; Yuni Ristanti
International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) (Special Issue) - International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) January 2
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56338/ijhess.v8i1.9972

Abstract

The Sale and Purchase Binding Agreement (PPJB) is one of the legal instruments commonly used in the practice of land purchase and sale transactions in Indonesia. PPJB is generally made when the parties have reached an agreement on the object and price, but have not been able to pour it into the Deed of Sale and Purchase (AJB) due to various administrative constraints, including incomplete land rights base. On the other hand, Article 1320 of the Civil Code requires the existence of a certain thing and halal cause as an objective condition for the validity of the agreement. This condition raises juridical problems: whether the PPJB made before a notary can still be declared valid and binding if the basis of land rights is not perfect, and how the notary is accountable in making the deed. This research is a normative legal research with a legislative approach, a conceptual approach, and a limited case approach. The results of the study show that PPJB with incomplete rights can basically still be declared valid as long as it meets the legal requirements of the agreement, especially regarding the agreement of the parties and the clarity of the agreed object, but the agreement only gives birth to the rights and obligations of the obligate and does not necessarily transfer the rights to the land. Notaries are obliged to conduct a reasonableness examination on the grounds of rights submitted by the parties, provide adequate explanations of legal risks, and refuse to make deeds if they are clearly contrary to laws and regulations. However, notaries are not burdened with the obligation to ensure the material correctness of land ownership, so that the notary's civil liability can only be requested if it is proven to be negligent or acts beyond the limits of his authority.
Mekanisme Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia Setelah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 : Fiduciary Guarantee Execution Mechanism Following Constitutional Court Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 Febrihadi Suparidho; Yuni Ristanti
Jurnal Kolaboratif Sains (Special Issue) - Jurnal Kolaboratif Sains (JKS) - Desember 2025
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56338/jks.v8i12.9991

Abstract

Jaminan fidusia merupakan salah satu instrumen utama dalam pembiayaan modern di Indonesia, khususnya dalam sektor pembiayaan konsumen, pembiayaan kendaraan bermotor, dan pembiayaan modal kerja. Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia memberikan kedudukan istimewa kepada kreditur pemegang jaminan melalui adanya titel eksekutorial dalam sertipikat jaminan fidusia serta kewenangan untuk melakukan eksekusi secara langsung (parate eksekusi) tanpa melalui putusan pengadilan. Praktik di lapangan menunjukkan bahwa kewenangan tersebut sering dimaknai secara berlebihan oleh pelaku usaha pembiayaan dengan cara melakukan penarikan objek jaminan secara paksa, bahkan disertai kekerasan, sehingga menimbulkan konflik sosial dan mengundang kritik terhadap perlindungan hak konstitusional debitur. Dalam konteks tersebut, Mahkamah Konstitusi melalui Putusan Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 melakukan penafsiran ulang terhadap ketentuan Pasal 15 ayat (2) dan ayat (3) UU Jaminan Fidusia. Mahkamah menyatakan bahwa ketentuan mengenai titel eksekutorial dan parate eksekusi sertipikat jaminan fidusia adalah konstitusional sepanjang dimaknai bahwa eksekusi hanya dapat dilakukan apabila debitur telah secara sukarela mengakui adanya wanprestasi dan menyerahkan objek jaminan. Apabila debitur menolak adanya wanprestasi atau keberatan atas pelaksanaan eksekusi, maka kreditur wajib menempuh mekanisme gugatan atau permohonan eksekusi melalui pengadilan. Putusan ini menimbulkan dampak yang luas bagi praktik pembiayaan dan penegakan hukum di bidang jaminan fidusia. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis implikasi yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 terhadap mekanisme eksekusi jaminan fidusia di Indonesia. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 tidak menghapus keberlakuan titel eksekutorial dan parate eksekusi dalam jaminan fidusia, tetapi membatasi penerapannya agar selaras dengan prinsip perlindungan hak asasi manusia, khususnya hak atas rasa aman dan perlindungan dari tindakan sewenang-wenang. Putusan ini menggeser paradigma eksekusi jaminan fidusia dari model yang sangat pro-kreditur menjadi lebih seimbang dengan mengakui hak debitur untuk menggugat adanya wanprestasi. Namun demikian, pembatasan tersebut juga memunculkan kekhawatiran mengenai berkurangnya efektivitas jaminan fidusia sebagai instrumen jaminan kebendaan yang cepat dan pasti.
PENGHENTIAN PENYIDIKAN DAN PENUNTUTAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI OLEH KPK: SEBUAH PENELUSURAN TEORETIS: Termination of Investigation and Prosecution of Corruption Crimes by The KPK: A Theoretical Exploration Ahwan Ahwan; Yuni Ristanti
Ganec Swara Vol. 19 No. 2 (2025): Juni 2025
Publisher : Yayasan Al-Amin Qalbu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59896/gara.v19i2.272

Abstract

The termination of investigation and prosecution of corruption crimes is one of the important substances of the amendment to Law Number 19 of 2019 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission. The emergence of this mechanism in the KPK's authority triggered discourse in the academic realm and legal practice. Naturally, because this mechanism was previously one of the special elements owned by the KPK that excluded the provisions of the codification of criminal procedure law (KUHAP). This article takes a place as a supporter with the basis of argumentation on the theoretical aspects and urgency of the mechanism for terminating investigations and prosecutions by the KPK. This paper uses a normative legal research method that entirely uses legal materials obtained through literature studies. The results show that the termination of investigation and prosecution of corruption crimes is based on the sunrise principle and sunset principle as well as the shield function and the sword function as well as the principle of realistic prospect of conviction which in its implementation has two filters, namely evidential sufficiency and public interest. From a theoretical perspective, the termination of investigation and prosecution can be traced from the integrative theory. This theory is described as a basis that provides balance in criminal procedure law and is sourced from customary law and the way of life of Indonesian society. In terms of urgency, the authority to terminate investigations and prosecutions provides additional alternatives for the KPK in handling corruption crimes, especially in realizing legal certainty and the principle of speedy trial in criminal procedure law.
Co-Authors Ahwan Ahwan Febrihadi Suparidho