Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis
Lutfi Yusup Rahmathoni
a:1:{s:5:"id_ID";s:28:"Universitas Islam Kalimantan";}
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
PERBEDAAN MAKNA RESTORATIVE JUSTICE PASCA PERMA NO.1 TAHUN 2024 PADA SISTEM HUKUM PIDANA DI INDONESIA Lutfi Yusup Rahmathoni
Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis Vol 5 No 10 (2024): Tema Filsafat Hukum, Politik Hukum dan Etika Profesi Hukum
Publisher : CV Rewang Rencang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56370/jhlg.v5i10.567

Abstract

ABSTRACT This research discusses the different meanings of Restorative. Justice. in the criminal law system in Indonesia, especially after the issuance of Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) no. 1 of 2024. Restorative. Justice. is seen as an alternative solution that can accommodate the interests of all parties in handling criminal cases. and focuses on recovery for all parties involved, but there are discrepancies in its implementation in various legal agencies.This research uses a doctrinal approach with statutory and conceptual analysis. Data was collected through literature studies and analysis of existing policies, including Police Regulations, Prosecutor's Regulations, and Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 1 of 2024. A prescriptive approach is used to provide arguments about the ideal implementation of Restorative Justice.The results of the discussion show that differences in understanding of restorative justice between the police, prosecutors and courts can cause disagreements and conflicts in implementation. Restorative Justice can function as a method of resolving cases or as a philosophical approach in the judicial process. Clear and uniform guidelines are needed to ensure consistency in the implementation of Restorative Justice at all stages of the justice system.This research concludes that to achieve effective and consistent implementation of restorative justice, all legal agencies need to have the same understanding of this concept. With uniform policies and training for law enforcement officers, Restorative Justice can function as an optimal instrument of justice, providing benefits for victims, perpetrators and society as a whole in Indonesia.Keywords: Differences in Meaning, Restorative Justice, Perma No.1 of 2024, Criminal Law System in Indonesia.
Kepastian Hukum dalam Sistem Praperadilan Pidana terhadap Saksi Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi Karesya Rezkia Pasha; Akhmad Munawar; Lutfi Yusup Rahmathoni
Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis Vol 5 No 7 (2024): Tema Hukum Pidana
Publisher : CV Rewang Rencang

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

Abstract

Referring to Article 1, Paragraph 2 of Law No. 31 of 2014 of the Republic of Indonesia, “witness-perpetrator” is suspect, defendant, or convict cooperates in supporting the law enforcement process to uncover a criminal act in the same case. The legal issue regarding the construction of pretrial procedures concerning the designation of “witness-perpetrator” in corruption follows: when a witness false testimony, there are provisions in the under Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) strictly regulated, emphasizing and essential function of reviewing the legality of the process, based on the initial actions arrest and detention, which are considered coercive measures under the law.
Konsep Presidensial Threshold terhadap Demokrasi di Indonesia Lutfi Yusup Rahmathoni; Sri Herlina
Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis Vol 6 No 8 (2025): Tema Hukum Pemerintahan
Publisher : CV Rewang Rencang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56370/jhlg.v6i8.1791

Abstract

Presidential Threshold in Indonesia’s democratic system focuses on its alignment with the principles of democracy as stipulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The Presidential Threshold is a provision that sets a minimum requirement for nominating presidential and vice-presidential candidates. Although argued to simplify the contest and maintain governmental stability, this policy is considered contrary to democratic principles that uphold freedom, equality, and public representation. This study employs a juridical-normative method with an approach based on democratic theory and statutory regulations. The findings indicate that the implementation of the Presidential Threshold presents a dilemma between forming a strong and stable government and the importance of maintaining openness to diverse political participation. While the policy aims to streamline the electoral system, in practice it may violate democratic principles, particularly regarding the protection of the right to be elected, and contradict the principles of representation, freedom to run for office, and fairness in a pure democracy. Therefore, it is necessary to establish new regulations to balance the goal of political stability with the principle of popular sovereignty.
Co-Authors Akhmad Munawar Karesya Rezkia Pasha Sri Herlina