Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.835
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum Priviet Social Sciences Journal Law Research Review Quarterly
Auliah Ambarwati
Universitas Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

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

Found 5 Documents
Search

 1 
Dissenting opinion Hakim Terhadap Kompetensi Absolut Pengadilan Negeri Dalam Perkara Wanprestasi Perjanjian Pembagian Harta Bersama Reza Kautsar Kusumahpraja; M. Reyhan Aldabena; Auliah Ambarwati
Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum Vol 6 No 1 (2026): Maret
Publisher : LOCUS MEDIA PUBLISHING

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56128/jkih.v6i1.677

Abstract

Negara membagi kekuasaan menjadi tiga, yaitu eksekutif, legislatif, dan yudikatif. Di Indonesia, kekuasaan yudikatif dijalankan oleh Mahkamah Agung beserta badan peradilan di bawahnya, yaitu Peradilan Umum, Agama, Tata Usaha Negara, dan Militer, yang masing-masing memiliki kompetensi absolut. Dalam Putusan Nomor 15/Pdt.G/2021/PN.Msh terdapat dissenting opinion terkait gugatan wanprestasi pembagian harta bersama pasca perceraian. Mayoritas hakim menyatakan gugatan tidak dapat diterima, sedangkan hakim dissenting berpendapat Pengadilan Negeri Masohi berwenang. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, kasus, dan konseptual, serta dianalisis secara kualitatif deduktif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dissenting opinion diatur dalam Pasal 14 ayat (3) Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009. Putusan yang menyatakan gugatan tidak dapat diterima dinilai keliru, sehingga diperlukan pengaturan teknis mengenai dissenting opinion.
Perlindungan Korban dalam Kerangka Keadilan Restoratif pada Pembaharuan Sistem Hukum Nasional Feby Reski Utami; Litya Surisdani Anggraeniko; Auliah Ambarwati
Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum Vol 6 No 1 (2026): Maret
Publisher : LOCUS MEDIA PUBLISHING

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56128/jkih.v6i1.895

Abstract

Artikel ini menganalisis perlindungan korban dalam perspektif keadilan restoratif serta posisinya dalam pembaharuan sistem hukum nasional indonesia. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa keadilan restoratif menempatkan korban sebagai subjek hukum yang berhak atas pemulihan melalui partisipasi aktif dalam proses penyelesaian perkara pidana. Pembaharuan melalui undang-undang nomor 1 tahun 2023 tentang kuhp dan undang-undang nomor 20 tahun 2025 tentang kuhap mencerminkan pergeseran dari pendekatan retributif menuju restoratif yang lebih berorientasi pada pemulihan korban. Namun, pengaturannya masih bersifat normatif dan belum sepenuhnya operasional, sehingga perlindungan korban belum optimal. Diperlukan penguatan regulasi yang lebih konkret untuk menjamin pemenuhan hak korban secara efektif.
Admissibility of digital evidence in Indonesia: Criminal–civil implications for the chain of custody and evidentiary validity Litya Surisdani Anggraeniko; Auliah Ambarwati; Feby Reski Utami
Priviet Social Sciences Journal Vol. 6 No. 4 (2026): April 2026
Publisher : Privietlab

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55942/pssj.v6i4.1566

Abstract

Digital evidence has become a cornerstone of modern litigation in Indonesia; however, its admissibility remains complex because of the varying standards of proof across legal regimes. This study analyzes the construction of digital evidence admissibility following the enactment of Law No. 20 of 2025 (The New Criminal Procedure Code) and its harmonization with Law No. 11 of 2008 (UU ITE). Methodologically, this research employs a doctrinal legal analysis with a conceptual and statutory approach, utilizing court judgments as doctrinal illustrations to identify judicial inconsistencies in handling electronic data. The findings reveal that while Article 177 paragraph (1) letter f of Law No. 20/2025 now explicitly recognizes electronic information as independent evidence, its validity is strictly contingent upon Chain of Custody (CoC) compliance. In criminal proceedings, CoC lapses, such as failure in hashing or unauthorized access, frequently lead to the exclusion of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Conversely, in civil cases, procedural defects typically result in a reduction in probative value rather than total inadmissibility, governed by the principle of functional equivalence. To mitigate judicial disparity, this study proposes a Criminal–Civil Admissibility Matrix and a Minimum CoC Checklist comprising five technical indicators: lawful acquisition, hashing, forensic imaging, documented transfer, and expert certification. These frameworks serve as normative guides to ensure the integrity, authenticity, and reliability of digital proof in the Indonesian judiciary.
Reconstruction Of Indonesian Contract Law Toward Substantial Justice Auliah Ambarwati; Anggi Sri Haryati Simarmata; Afnan Raodah
Law Research Review Quarterly Vol. 12 No. 4 (2026): Articles in Press
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lrrq.v12i4.46823

Abstract

Indonesian contract law, rooted in the Civil Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata / KUH Perdata) inherited from the Dutch colonial era, has long prioritized freedom of contract and formal legal certainty. However, this paradigm frequently overlooks structural inequalities between contracting parties, rendering contracts susceptible to becoming instruments of legalized injustice. This article aims to examine the reconstruction of Indonesian contract law toward substantial justice through four strategic steps: (1) reinterpretation of the principle of freedom of contract, bounded by propriety, balance, and good faith; (2) strengthening of the principle of balance as a corrective mechanism against the unequal positioning of parties; (3) substantive revitalization of good faith as an animating principle throughout all phases of the contractual relationship; and (4) expansion of the judicial role as an active guardian of justice. This research employs a normative legal method with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Primary legal materials include the Civil Code, court decisions, and relevant legislation, while secondary legal materials encompass scholarly literature and national as well as international legal journals. The findings indicate that true contractual justice cannot be measured solely by the existence of formal consent, but must be assessed against whether the substance and process of contract formation are genuinely fair, balanced, and respectful of the dignity of all parties. A reconstruction of contract law that integrates substantial justice will transform it from a mere instrument of formal certainty into a genuine means of realizing a more just and dignified society.
The Development of the concept of unlawful act in a contemporary perspective Auliah Ambarwati; Berthon Jonathan; Aryoko Abdurrachman
Law Research Review Quarterly Vol. 12 No. 6 (2026): Special Edition Part 2
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lrrq.v12i6.63015

Abstract

The evolution of the doctrine of Unlawful Acts (Perbuatan Melawan Hukum/PMH) demonstrates increasingly complex dynamics within contemporary legal contexts. Rooted originally in the concept of onrechtmatige daad in Dutch civil law, this doctrine continues to evolve in response to demands for justice and the development of modern society. In Islamic economic law, the concept of PMH is connected to the principles of adl (justice) and maslahah (public interest), whereby an act is deemed unlawful not merely because it violates positive norms, but also because it contravenes moral and Sharia values. In contrast, within the common law system, PMH has its counterpart in the concept of tort, which emphasizes individual responsibility for the violation of others' rights through the principles of duty of care and negligence. Furthermore, the doctrine highlights third-party liability (third-party liability) in PMH, particularly when indirect involvement causes harm to others, such as through aiding and abetting or vicarious liability. Additionally, the doctrine of onrechtmatige overheidsdaad extends the scope of PMH to unlawful acts committed by those in power, affirming that the state too may be held accountable when its administrative actions or policies violate citizens' rights. Thus, contemporary PMH doctrine is no longer merely a civil law instrument, but rather has become a pillar of justice that balances legal accountability among individuals, corporate entities, and the state across various modern legal systems.
Co-Authors Afnan Raodah Anggi Sri Haryati Simarmata Aryoko Abdurrachman Berthon Jonathan Feby Reski Utami Litya Surisdani Anggraeniko M. Reyhan Aldabena Reza Kautsar Kusumahpraja