cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Arnis Duwita Purnama
Contact Email
jurnal@komisiyudisial.go.id
Phone
+628121368480
Journal Mail Official
jurnal@komisiyudisial.go.id
Editorial Address
Redaksi Jurnal Yudisial Gd. Komisi Yudisial RI Jl. Kramat Raya No. 57 Jakarta Pusat
Location
Kota adm. jakarta pusat,
Dki jakarta
INDONESIA
Jurnal Yudisial
Published by Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia
ISSN : 19786506     EISSN : 25794868     DOI : 10.29123
Core Subject : Social,
Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
Jurnal Yudisial memuat hasil penelitian putusan hakim atas suatu kasus konkret yang memiliki aktualitas dan kompleksitas permasalahan hukum, baik dari pengadilan di Indonesia maupun luar negeri dan merupakan artikel asli (belum pernah dipublikasikan). Visi: Menjadikan Jurnal Yudisial sebagai jurnal berskala internasional. Misi: 1. Sebagai ruang kontribusi bagi komunitas hukum Indonesia dalam mendukung eksistensi peradilan yang akuntabel, jujur, dan adil. 2. Membantu tugas dan wewenang Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia dalam menjaga dan menegakkan kode etik dan pedoman perilaku hakim.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 346 Documents
 31   32   33   34   35 
MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM PERSPEKTIF INDEKS DEMOKRASI DAN OTONOMI DAERAH Inna Junaenah
Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 18 No. 1 (2025): STRICT LIABILITY
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v18i1.706

Abstract

The Constitutional Court (MK) holds a primary role as the guardian of democracy and the constitution. Nevertheless, the MK’s role, as evidenced by its legal reasoning and judgments, has not consistently reflected its function in upholding democratic values. This MK’s strategic role is reflected, among other indicators, in the democracy index published by the Economist Intelligence Unit. The 2022 democracy index report noted that Judgment Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 contributed to Indonesia’s 2021 democracy score. However, this assessment was not sustained, as Judgment Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 subsequently contributed to a decline in Indonesia’s democracy index in 2024. This article adopts a doctrinal legal research methodology, utilizing both case and statutory approaches to analyze the concepts of the democracy index, constitutionalism, and decentralization. The findings highlight two principal aspects. First, an analysis of the interplay between the MK’s judgments and the indicators of the democracy index provides a conceptual framework for understanding the MK’s influence on fluctuations in Indonesia’s democratic score. In this context, MK’s role as the guardian of democracy significantly affects the quality of judicial independence, which serves as an indicator of democracy and democratization at the central government level. Additionally, the enforcement of statutory norms arising from the MK’s judgments further shapes the structure of regional autonomy. Second, from the perspective of regional autonomy, Judgment Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 enables greater public participation at the regional level by extending attention to the principle of meaningful participation in the process of regional law-making. On the contrary, Judgment Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 represents a regression in regional autonomy, as evidenced by the diminished discretion of regional governments to determine local leadership through democratic means and to guarantee equal access for all citizens to stand for public office. Additionally, Judgment Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 and Number 2/PHPU.PRES-XXII/2024 appears to legitimize dynastic political practices and may further contribute to decreased voter participation. Identifying these implications, these findings underscore the importance of maintaining the MK’s consistency in fulfilling its role as the guardian of democracy and of strengthening public oversight of the MK’s role as part of broader efforts to preserve the integrity of regional autonomy.
INKONSISTENSI MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM MENGADILI PERKARA BATAS USIA CALON WAKIL PRESIDEN M Beni Kurniawan; Sri Ayu Ramadani
Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 18 No. 1 (2025): STRICT LIABILITY
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v18i1.718

Abstract

The Constitutional Court’s inconsistency in adjudicating judicial review cases concerning the age requirement for vice-presidential candidates has set a precedent that undermines the Constitutional Court’s integrity and credibility. Judgment Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 has attracted significant attention because, on the same day, the Constitutional Court rendered two judgments concerning substantially similar issues relating to the age requirement for vice-presidential candidates yet reached different rulings. This situation raises questions regarding the factors underlying the Constitutional Court’s inconsistency in adjudicating such cases. This study aims to analyse the cause of this inconsistency, and to formulate the appropriate ruling consistent with the legal reasoning of the constitutional court justices. This study employs a normative legal research method using a prescriptive approach through an analysis of the legal reasoning underpinning the judgment. The findings indicate that Judgment Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 should have been limited to the office of governor, as this represented the common ground among the five constitutional justices who voted to grant the petition in part. Accordingly, the ruling should read: “at least 40 years of age or has served or is serving as a governor.” This study concludes that Constitutional Court’s inconsistency stems from three principal factors: the inconsistent application of the open legal policy doctrine, the judicialization of politics in judicial decision-making, and a conflict of interest arising in Judgment Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023. Accordingly, it is necessary to strengthen the standards for the application of the open legal policy doctrine and to enhance oversight mechanisms for potential conflicts of interest to safeguard the consistency of judicial decisions, institutional integrity, and public confidence in the Constitutional Court.
SISTEM PEMBUKTIAN DALAM PENETAPAN PIDANA TAMBAHAN UANG PENGGANTI Desia Rakhma Banjarani; Mada Apriandi Zuhir; Neisa Ang-rum Adisti
Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 18 No. 1 (2025): STRICT LIABILITY
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v18i1.721

Abstract

This article examines the application of evidentiary rules in the imposition of a compensation order as an additional penalty in corruption cases, with reference to Judgment Number 10/Pid.Sus-TPK/2015/PN.Pdg. The case concerns corruption in the procurement of a catheterization laboratory (cathlab) at the National Stroke Hospital, Bukittinggi, West Sumatra. The judgment is noteworthy because no compensation order was imposed despite the existence of state financial losses resulting from the corruption offense. Accordingly, this article analyses the legal basis for the court’s decision not to impose a compensation order and examines judicial reasoning that appears inconsistent with witness testimony. This study employs a normative legal research method using case, statutory, and conceptual approaches. The findings indicate that although the panel of judges expressly acknowledged the existence of state financial losses resulting from the defendant’s conduct, the operative part of the judgment did not impose a compensation order as an additional penalty. This outcome is inconsistent with the objective of recovering state losses as stipulated under the Anti-Corruption Law. Furthermore, the study identifies inconsistencies between judicial reasoning and witness testimony concerning the implementation of equipment testing and functional testing procedures. These inconsistencies have implications for the observance of evidentiary principles and the principle of seeking material truth. The judgment is therefore considered inconsistent with theories of justice and utility and may weaken the effectiveness of anti-corruption law enforcement.
PENJATUHAN HUKUMAN MELAMPAUI UNSUR JARIMAH PEMERKOSAAN DALAM PERSPEKTIF ASAS LEGALITAS Mansari Mansari; Fauziati Fauziati; Khairuddin Khairuddin
Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 18 No. 1 (2025): STRICT LIABILITY
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v18i1.735

Abstract

This study examines Judgment Number 26/JN/2024/MS.Bna, which imposed a sentence of 150 months’ imprisonment for the jarimah/offense of rape against a child under Article 50 of the Qanun Jinayat. This case warrants further analysis because the facts established at trial support only the offense of sexual harassment committed by an adult against a child under Article 47 of the Qanun Jinayat. The main constituent elements of rape, namely the use of violence, coercion, or threats, were not established at trial, nevertheless, the defendant was convicted under the legal classification of rape. This circumstance raises significant concerns relating to the proper application of the law, legal certainty, and the administration of justice. This study aims to analyze the imposition of a sentence without satisfying the constituent elements of the offense of rape and to assess the judgment from the perspectives of legal certainty, justice, and victim protection. This study employs a normative legal research method with a case-study approach. Data were collected through an analysis of judgments, a review of relevant legal literature, and interviews with legal practitioners. The findings indicate that the sentence imposed is legally improper and violates the principle of legality because it was imposed without satisfying the constituent elements of rape as prescribed under Article 50 of the Qanun Jinayat. The facts established at trial demonstrate the existence of enticement, which does not constitute an element of rape under the jinayat law. This judgment does not reflect legal certainty and justice for the offender, although, from the perspective of victim protection, it may be regarded as providing a sense of security. This study recommends the reformulation of Article 50 of the Qanun Jinayat by clarifying the legal classification of child rape through the incorporation of deception or enticement as constituent elements, in order to promote justice and child protection in Aceh.
KETERLAMBATAN PENANGANAN LAPORAN MASYARAKAT OLEH KOMISI YUDISIAL DALAM PERSPEKTIF PERBUATAN MELAWAN HUKUM OLEH PENGUASA (ONRECHTMATIGE OVERHEIDSDAAD) Rahayu Susanti; Tata Wijayanta; Mailinda Eka Yuniza
Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 18 No. 2 (2025)
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v18i2.738

Abstract

Professionalism in public service delivery is a prerequisite for every state institution, including the Judicial Commission, in following up public complaint reports concerning alleged violations of the Code of Ethics and Judicial Conduct (KEPPH). This study examines Judgment Number 405/Pdt.G/2023/PN.Smg concerning a claim of onrechtmatige overheidsdaad filed against the Judicial Commission arising from delays in handling public complaint reports. This study aims to analyze the judicial reasoning in determining whether the alleged lack of professionalism of the Judicial Commission may be classified as onrechtmatige overheidsdaad. The study also analyzes the corrective measures undertaken by the Judicial Commission to address factors that cause delays in handling public reports in the future. This study employs normative legal research using a case approach. The findings indicate that the panel of judges did not explicitly base its reasoning on the doctrine of onrechtmatige overheidsdaad. Instead, the judicial reasoning primarily focused on the Judicial Commission’s institutional status as a state institution responsible for public service delivery. The panel of judges found indications of a lack of professionalism based on evidence demonstrating delays and procedural deviations in handling public reports. The study further shows that the Judicial Commission has implemented improvements by streamlining report-handling procedures through revisions to its internal regulations and strengthening its digital-based report-handling system. These measures are intended to improve the efficiency, transparency, and accountability of public service delivery. These measures reflect Judicial Commission’s commitment to administrative reform to prevent recurring delays in handling public reports while continuously improving the quality of public service delivery.
PENALARAN HUKUM HAKIM DALAM MENERAPKAN PRINSIP STRICT LIABILITY TERHADAP PERKARA KEBAKARAN HUTAN Hera Alvina Satriawan; M. Hotibul Islami; Yudi Pratama Putra
Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 18 No. 1 (2025): STRICT LIABILITY
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v18i1.750

Abstract

This study analyses the application of the principle of strict liability in Judgment Number 456/Pdt.G-LH/2016/PN.Jkt.Sel concerning environmental litigation in Indonesia. The a quo case arose from a claim for damages and environmental restoration filed by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia against PT Waringin Agro Jaya for allegedly failing to control forest and peatland fires in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province, resulting in substantial environmental damage. In its ruling, the panel of judges not only granted the claim in part but also ordered the defendant to pay damages and undertake environmental restoration, thereby giving effect to the principle of strict liability. This study focuses on the judicial reasoning underlying the application of the principle of strict liability to achieve substantive justice, as well as the legal reasoning adopted by the court in deciding the case. This study employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, comparative, and case-study approaches to provide a more holistic analysis. The findings indicate that the panel of judges adopted a progressive and consistent approach in applying the principle of strict liability, thereby contributing to environmental protection by imposing strict liability on business actors. Nevertheless, the study also identifies ambiguity in the judicial reasoning concerning the determination of environmental restoration costs, which ultimately affects legal certainty and the effective implementation of the judgment.

Page 35 of 35 | Total Record : 346

 31   32   33   34   35 

Filter by Year

2010 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 19 No. 1 (2026) Vol. 18 No. 2 (2025) Vol. 18 No. 1 (2025): STRICT LIABILITY Vol. 17 No. 3 (2024): DISPUTE OF RIGHT Vol. 17 No. 2 (2024): Child Protection Vol. 17 No. 1 (2024): ECOLOGICAL JUSTICE Vol. 16 No. 3 (2023): DISPARITAS PUTUSAN Vol. 16 No. 2 (2023): NOODWEER Vol. 16 No. 1 (2023): NIETIG Vol 15, No 3 (2022): BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD Vol. 15 No. 3 (2022): BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD Vol 15, No 2 (2022): HUKUM PROGRESIF Vol. 15 No. 2 (2022): HUKUM PROGRESIF Vol 15, No 1 (2022): ARBITRIO IUDICIS Vol. 15 No. 1 (2022): ARBITRIO IUDICIS Vol 14, No 3 (2021): LOCUS STANDI Vol 14, No 2 (2021): SUMMUM IUS SUMMA INIURIA Vol. 14 No. 1 (2021): OPINIO JURIS SIVE NECESSITATIS Vol 14, No 1 (2021): OPINIO JURIS SIVE NECESSITATIS Vol 13, No 3 (2020): DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Vol. 13 No. 3 (2020): DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Vol. 13 No. 2 (2020): VINCULUM JURIS Vol 13, No 2 (2020): VINCULUM JURIS Vol. 13 No. 1 (2020): REASON AND PASSION Vol 13, No 1 (2020): REASON AND PASSION Vol 12, No 3 (2019): LOCI IMPERIA Vol 12, No 2 (2019): ACTA NON VERBA Vol 12, No 1 (2019): POLITIK DAN HUKUM Vol 11, No 3 (2018): PARI PASSU Vol 11, No 2 (2018): IN CAUSA POSITUM Vol 11, No 1 (2018): IUS BONUMQUE Vol 10, No 3 (2017): ALIENI JURIS Vol 10, No 2 (2017): EX FIDA BONA Vol 10, No 1 (2017): ABROGATIO LEGIS Vol 9, No 3 (2016): [DE]KONSTRUKSI HUKUM Vol 9, No 2 (2016): DINAMIKA "CORPUS JURIS" Vol 9, No 1 (2016): DIVERGENSI TAFSIR Vol 8, No 3 (2015): IDEALITAS DAN REALITAS KEADILAN Vol 8, No 2 (2015): FLEKSIBILITAS DAN RIGIDITAS BERHUKUM Vol 8, No 1 (2015): DIALEKTIKA HUKUM NEGARA DAN AGAMA Vol 7, No 3 (2014): LIBERTAS, JUSTITIA, VERITAS Vol 7, No 2 (2014): DISPARITAS YUDISIAL Vol 7, No 1 (2014): CONFLICTUS LEGEM Vol 6, No 3 (2013): PERTARUNGAN ANTARA KUASA DAN TAFSIR Vol 6, No 2 (2013): HAK DALAM KEMELUT HUKUM Vol 6, No 1 (2013): MENAKAR RES JUDICATA Vol 5, No 3 (2012): MERENGKUH PENGAKUAN Vol 5, No 2 (2012): KUASA PARA PENGUASA Vol 5, No 1 (2012): MENGUJI TAFSIR KEADILAN Vol 4, No 3 (2011): SIMULACRA KEADILAN Vol 4, No 2 (2011): ANTINOMI PENEGAKAN HUKUM Vol 4, No 1 (2011): INDEPENDENSI DAN RASIONALITAS Vol 3, No 3 (2010): PERGULATAN NALAR DAN NURANI Vol 3, No 2 (2010): KOMPLEKSITAS PUNITAS Vol 3, No 1 (2010): KORUPSI DAN LEGISLASI More Issue