Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure
The De Jure Legal Research Journal, known as Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, is a legal publication issued three times a year in March, July, and November. It is published by the Law Policy Strategy Agency of the Ministry of Law of the Republic of Indonesia, in collaboration with the Indonesian Legal Researcher Association (IPHI). This association was legalized under the Decree of the Minister of Law and Human Rights Number AHU-13.AHA.01.07 in 2013, dated January 28, 2013. The journal serves as a platform for communication and a means to publish diverse and relevant legal issues primarily for Indonesian legal researchers and the broader legal community. In 2024, the management of the De Jure Legal Research Journal will include various stakeholders, as outlined in the Decree of the Head of the Law and Human Rights Policy Agency Number PPH-18.LT.04.03 for 2024, dated February 20, 2024, which establishes a publishing team for the journal. According to the Decree of the Director-General of Higher Education, Research, and Technology of the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia, Number PPH-18.LT.04.03 for 2024, which is based on the Accreditation Results of Scientific Journals for Period 2 of 2024, the De Jure Legal Research Journal has achieved a Scientific Journal Accreditation Rank of 2 (Sinta-2). This reaccreditation is valid for Volume 23, Number 1, of the year 2023, through Volume 27, Number 4, of the year 2027.
Articles
327 Documents
<![CDATA[Perbandingan Ketentuan Pidana Legislasi Nasional Negara Sponsor Deep-Seabed Mining ]]>
<![CDATA[Ratna Galuh Manika Trisista]]>;
<![CDATA[Farhana Farhana]]>;
<![CDATA[Hamdan Azhar Siregar]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 23, No 3 (2023): September Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2023.V23.375-388
<![CDATA[National legislation is the requirement established by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for each country sponsoring Deep-seabed Mining (DSM) and criminal provisions and sanctions are an inseparable part of it. A total of 38 states are listed as sponsoring states, while Indonesia, with its potential as a maritime country and member of UNCLOS 1982, has not participated in DSM activities. This article aims to explore and compare the criminal provisions in the national legislation of sponsoring states that have been approved by the ISA so that the formulation of sanctions in Indonesian national legislation can be illustrated in order to prepare Indonesia’s contribution as a sponsoring state for DSM activities in the International Seabed Area. The research method used is normative juridical with a statute and comparative approach. The research results show that the majority of sponsoring states in their criminal provisions stipulate criminal sanctions in the form of fines as well as the possibility of imprisonment and several administrative sanctions. Based on the results of this comparative study, it can be concluded that the formulation of sanctions that can be regulated in Indonesian national legislation is a maximum fine of more than 100 billion Rupiah and a maximum prison sentence of not less than 5 years, as well as additional criminal penalties and administrative sanctions in the form of termination or revocation of DSM activity permits, confiscation of profits resulting from illegal DSM acquisition, and compensation for environmental damage caused by DSM activities.]]>
<![CDATA[Kedudukan Negara sebagai Pemegang Saham Dwiwarna dalam Privatisasi Perusahaan Anggota Holding BUMN ]]>
<![CDATA[Huta Disyon]]>;
<![CDATA[Elisatris Gultom]]>;
<![CDATA[Ema Rahmawati]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 23, No 3 (2023): September Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2023.V23.299-312
<![CDATA[According to Government Regulation 72/2016, the formation of state-owned-holding-companies (“SOHC”) is accomplished using the transfer mechanism, which transforms State shares in SOEs into equity in other SOEs, resulting in a change in the status of share ownership of holding-member-companies from being owned directly by the State to being owned by the holding company. GR 72/2016 also requires the state to own shares with special rights in holding-members-companies originating from ex-SOE, which can only be owned by the state, known as Dwiwarna shares. Potential issues arise because of the ambiguity of the controlling authority role in managing a SOHC, whether the state still holds it or has been transferred to the parent company, including in terms of selling shares of holding-member-companies. Hopefully, this study will provide the State with legal certainty, benefits, and justice in privatizing holding-member companies. The research methodology used is a normative juridical approach with qualitative normative legal research that relies on secondary data from the library. This study indicates that the State’s Controlling Rights are based on state ownership of Dwiwarna shares in holding-member companies originating from ex-SOE, implying that the sale of company shares only sometimes results in reduced state control and ownership. As a result, the sale of series B shares may be accomplished using corporate regulations in line with their respective authorities. Meanwhile, the State must carry out the sale of Dwiwarna shares, per GR 33/2005. The author recommends that the State create a new mechanism for exercising Dwiwarna shareholder privileges so that the implementation of the absolute authority and rights for Dwiwarna shareholders can proceed in an orderly and legal manner.]]>
<![CDATA[Penundukan Diri Non-Muslim dalam Qanun Jinayat Aceh: Penyimpangan atau Pengembangan Asas Hukum Pidana? ]]>
<![CDATA[Mohd. Din]]>;
<![CDATA[Ali Abubakar]]>;
<![CDATA[Marah Halim]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 23, No 3 (2023): September Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2023.V23.313-324
<![CDATA[This article aims to provide legal logic for the permissibility of choosing criminal law for non-Muslims who commit criminal acts regulated in the Aceh Qanun Jinayat based on one of the legal principles raised (endorsement) as the basis for establishing norms in the qanun in question, namely the principle of submission which is actually not recognized in criminal law. The research data are several decisions of the Syar’iyah Court in Aceh against violations of the Qanun Jinayat committed by non-Muslims. It is assumed that the decisionis a shift in the principles of criminal law. This problem will be analyzed by observing the basic principles of criminal law, including the principles of the application of criminal law and the politics of criminal law. The results of the study showed that from the point of view of the principles of criminal law which is a compelling law, this submission is a deviation, but from a legal-political perspective, because the birth of permissible provisions in qanuns is a political process, where the demand to apply Islamic Sharia which basically only applies to Muslims, then as a softening of the territorial principle non-Muslims are allowed to vote.]]>
<![CDATA[Hak Menguasai Tanah oleh Negara dalam Penggunaan Tanah untuk Investasi ]]>
<![CDATA[Evi Djuniarti]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 23, No 4 (2023): December Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2023.V23.483-494
<![CDATA[Along with the enactment of Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation which regulates land acquisition for investment, there are several conflicts about that. These investment provisions prevent investors to invest their capital in Indonesia. One way to fulfill investors' wishes is to carry out legal transplantation and harmonization. The problems are related to land control by the state for investment and the existence of investment laws and Job Creation laws which has problems with current legal provisions, as well as how to utilize transplantation in harmonization of laws and regulations governing investment. This article aims to find a solution to accelerate regulation through transplantation and harmonization of law in the land sector. This research uses normative juridical methods. The results found were that the investment regulations in the land sector, and the regulations in the job creation law, still overlap so that it becomes an obstacle for investors. Therefore, the acceleration of regulations to fulfill investors' desires is carried out through transplantation and legal harmonization.]]>
<![CDATA[Indonesian Law and Artificial Intelligence: Balancing Accountability, Ethics, and Innovation ]]>
<![CDATA[Hasibuan, Rangga Hotman]]>;
<![CDATA[Rawung, Aurelya Jessica]]>;
<![CDATA[Wowiling, Fidel Jeremy]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 24, No 2 (2024): July Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2024.V24.121-132
<![CDATA[Artificial intelligence (AI), which includes computing for perception, cognition, and action, raises complicated legal issues. This research investigates AI’s influence and legal implications, focusing on its autonomy in communication and creativity, which raises problems about language, intellectual property, and ethical accountability. Discussions differ depending on whether they are influenced by the Common Law or Civil Law systems. While Common Law defines AI as “computer-generated work,” Civil Law tends to see AI as a legal thing. This research aims to formulate a solid ground for an AI legal framework in the Indonesian national legal system. The research undertaken involves a thorough analysis of academic literature, focusing on the legal and ethical implications of AI, highlighting the need for a nuanced perspective to define its subjectivity. In conclusion, the complex interplay between artificial intelligence (AI) and legal principles involves reframing old terminology. Existing models for AI duty are called into question, and vicarious liability is one possible answer. AI is a derived law problem, so it needs to be carefully calibratedfor responsible innovation while also keeping ethics and technological progress in check.]]>
<![CDATA[Quo Vadis Pengadilan Khusus di Indonesia dalam Batasan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi ]]>
<![CDATA[Bagus Hermanto]]>;
<![CDATA[Nyoman Mas Aryani]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 23, No 4 (2023): December Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2023.V23.403-418
<![CDATA[In Indonesia, special courts represent a phenomenon of judicial deference which is associated with an independent judicial system and supports the efficient and effective administration of justice. However, the practice in Indonesia shows that there is a need for further discursive research and thinking in the organization of the special justice system in Indonesia, based on internal and external issues in the realization of a special justice order that promotes substantive justice and is based on effectiveness, efficiency, and justice that is based on the needs of legal specificity under the specialized court context. This article utilizes dogmatic legal research based on a statutory approach, a case law approach, and a conceptual approach on a micro-legal research basis to examine the revamping of special courts in Indonesia, including the elaboration of Constitutional Court Decisions relevant to the strengthening of constitutional consolidation in post-reform Indonesia. Furthermore, the findings of this study show that the dynamics of special justice in Indonesia seem to be based on specific needs, international intervention in several cases, and ideas when the 1945 Constitution was amended by strengthening in accordance with conditions and times to achieve substantive justice. Similarly, the failure to build several special courts has become a discourse in recent decades, as various Constitutional Court decisions have directed topics that may be seen in the formation of special courts in the future. These include the existence of electoral and medical courts, which have also emerged as ideas for revamping specialized courts in Indonesia.]]>
<![CDATA[Impact of Criminal Code’s Articles 263 & 264: A Critical Look at Press Freedom and Human Rights ]]>
<![CDATA[Nova, Efren]]>;
<![CDATA[Fernando, Zico Junius]]>;
<![CDATA[Putra, Panca Sarjana]]>;
<![CDATA[Agusalim, Agusalim]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 24, No 2 (2024): July Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2024.V24.133-146
<![CDATA[The public, human rights advocates, and media practitioners have engagedin significant debate regarding Articles 263 and 264 of the new CriminalCode (KUHP). These articles establish laws that criminalize spreadingfalse news that could cause social unrest. The punishments for spreadingsuch information vary depending on the severity and intention behind itsdissemination. Articles 263(1) and (2) differentiate between intentionallyspreading false information that the perpetrator knows is untrue andspreading information that is reasonably believed to be false. The punishmentfor this offense can be imprisonment for up to six years or a maximumfine of category V. Article 264 specifically addresses the act of spreadingfalse information that the perpetrator knows is untrue. Meanwhile, Article264 specifically addresses the act of spreading ambiguous, exaggerated,or incomplete news. Those found guilty can face a maximum penalty oftwo years in prison or a category III fine. This study utilizes normativelegal methodologies, which include statutory, conceptual, comparative,and futuristic approaches. The research design is characterized by bothdescriptive and prescriptive elements. Content analysis was conductedto evaluate the collected data. The study’s findings illustrate that theprimary objective of Articles 263 and 264 of the new Criminal Code is tomaintain public order and deter riots that may arise as a consequence of thedissemination of incorrect information. Nevertheless, these provisions havebeen criticized for their potential to be used as a means to suppress pressfreedom and limit public expression, both of which are fundamental aspectsof democracy and the protection of human rights. Concerns have beenraised about the potential impact of the implementation of these articles onthe protection of press freedom as guaranteed by the Press Law.]]>
<![CDATA[Menakar Urgensi Kriminalisasi Kepemilikan Harta Tidak Wajar melalui Kebijakan Legislasi dalam Upaya Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Pratiwi, Rieska Ayu Bella]]>;
<![CDATA[Pambudi, Nur Khamnari Derby]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 24, No 1 (2024): March Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2024.V24.043-056
<![CDATA[Ownership of inappropriate assets by public officials or named illicit enrichment is still a hot issue. Indonesia itself has a wealth reporting instrument for public officials called the State Officials’ Wealth Report (LHKPN) as a means of controlling and supervising the wealth of public officials. In practice, many public officials have unappropriate assets and are suspected to have been obtained illegally, but these assets cannot be taken by the state because they have not been or have been proven to be the proceeds of criminal act. Thus, this research aims to examine the potential for resolving this problem by criminalizing the ownership of improper assets by public officials, which aims to minimize the incidence of state financial losses. Based on the results of the research, it shows that there are at least two alternative ways, namely (a) making the illegal ownership of public officials whose legality is not proven to be one of the criminal offenses of corruption through the revision of the Corruption Law; or (b) formulate and ratify provisions related to illicit enrichment in the Asset Confiscation Bill. The criminalization of illicit enrichment is a form of implementation of the provisions of Article 20 of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) as ratified by Indonesia with Law Number 7 of 2006 with the aim of preventing corrupt actions by public officials. This research uses a normative research method with a regulatory-legislative approach and a conceptual approach, the results of which are presented in prescriptive form.]]>
<![CDATA[Formulasi Penanganan Sanksi Pidana Kerja Sosial terhadap Pelaku Korupsi Berbasis Keadilan ]]>
<![CDATA[Husin, Umar]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 23, No 4 (2023): December Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2023.V23.495-506
<![CDATA[Law enforcement agrees that if crimes are categorized as serious or light, the perpetrators will be sentenced to prison sentences. There is no exception for perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption. In fact, Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code regulates social work crimes for perpetrators of corruption crimes. It is a question of what the ideal formulation of punishment should be for perpetrators of corruption crimes. The purpose of this writing is to obtain information related to the imposition of social work sanctions on perpetrators of corruption. The method used in this research is normative juridical. This research found that the application of social work criminal sanctions for perpetrators of crimes, especially corruption crimes, is part of fulfilling a sense of justice and respect for human rights. It also has an impact on reducing the number of convicts in correctional institutions. The government and DPR need to amend the Corruption Crime law so that it is in accordance with what is regulated in Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Indonesian Criminal Code, especially on article number 85]]>
<![CDATA[Aspek Hukum Hak Menguasai Negara DI Bidang Pertambangan Pasca Pembaruan Undang-Undang Mineral dan Batubara di Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Andri Yanto]]>;
<![CDATA[Faidatul Hikmah]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure Vol 23, No 4 (2023): December Edition ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Law and Human Rights Policy Strategy Agency, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of The Repub ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.30641/dejure.2023.V23.419-432
<![CDATA[The concept of State Control Rights, as constitutionally attributed in Article 33 Paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, constitutes a fundamental paradigm. The dialectics of mining policy formulation in Law No. 3 of 2020, which updated the regulation of minerals and coal, ushered in a series of transitions and consequences for the development of the concept of State Control in Indonesia, particularly concerning the substance of Article 4 Paragraph (2) of Law No. 3 of 2020, which introduced the policy of re-centralization. This research employs a juridical-normative method, utilizing a legislative approach and norm analysis pertaining to the concept of State Control Rights. The findings of this study indicate that, firstly, the formulation of state control in Law No. 3 of 2020 aligns intending to implement the concept of State Control as established by the Constitutional Court’s decision, emphasizing the permit system as a replacement for the contract system. Secondly, the centralization of authority over mineral and coal mining does not contradict the concept of State Control, as long as it can optimally generate an ideal and effective mining management system in advancing the prosperity of the people. The objective of this research is to provide a comprehensive overview of the application of State Control Rights in the revision of mining legislation, thereby offering policy insights for the development of substantive and just mining law in Indonesia.]]>
