cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Dr. Yati Nurhayati, SH.,MH
Contact Email
yatinurhayati1904@yahoo.com
Phone
+6281223692567
Journal Mail Official
yatinurhayati1904@yahoo.com
Editorial Address
Jl Adyaksa No.2 Banjarmasin, Kalimantan Selatan, Indonesia.
Location
Kota banjarmasin,
Kalimantan selatan
INDONESIA
Al-Adl : Jurnal Hukum
Published by Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al Banjari
ISSN : 19794940     EISSN : 24770124     DOI : -
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Al - Adl : Jurnal Hukum is a journal that contains scientific writings in the field of law either in the form of research lecturers and the results of studies in the field of law published the first time in 2008 with the period published twice a year. Al - Adl Journal of Law is registered in LIPI with the code E-ISSN 2477-0124 and P-ISSN 1979-4940. Every script that goes into the editorial will be reviewed by reviewers in accordance with the field of knowledge. The review process is not more than 1 month and there is already a decision about whether or not the submission is accepted.This journal provides open access which in principle makes research available for free to the public and will support the largest exchange of global knowledge. Al Adl : Jurnal Hukum publihes twice a year (biannually) on January and July focuses on matters relating to: - Criminal law - Business law - Constitutional law - State Administration Law - Islamic law - The Basic Law
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 276 Documents
 24   25   26   27   28 
TINJAUAN MAQASHID SYARIAH TERHADAP PERSELINGKUHAN SEBAGAI ALASAN POLIGAMI PADA PUTUSAN NOMOR 2982/PDT.G/2023/PA.BL Muhammad Rafi Azzizuddin; Abd. Rouf
Al-Adl : Jurnal Hukum Vol 18, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al Banjari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31602/al-adl.v18i1.17665

Abstract

In Court Decision Number 2982/Pdt.G/2023/PA.BL, the judge stipulated that infidelity may serve as a legal basis for polygamy. Statutorily, however, such a ground is not recognized within the formal requirements for polygamy under the prevailing Marriage Law. This study examines the use of infidelity as a justification for granting polygamy permits, specifically analyzing the judge's ratio decidendi in Decision Number 2982/Pdt.G/2023/PA.BL and evaluating it through the lens of Imam al-Shatibi’s maqashid al-shari’ah. This research adopts a normative legal method with a case approach. Legal materials are derived from secondary data collected through library research. Data processing involves editing, classifying, analyzing, and concluding, while the analysis of legal materials is conducted qualitatively with a prescriptive approach. The findings demonstrate that Decision Number 2982/Pdt.G/2023/PA.BL is consistent with maqashid al-shari’ah. Regarding the core issue—polygamy on the grounds of infidelity—the petition technically fails to meet the criteria stipulated in the Marriage Law. Nevertheless, the panel of judges exercised judicial discretion, considering various dimensions and emphasizing the substantial harm (mudharat) that would ensue should the petition be rejected. Within the framework of Imam al-Shatibi’s maqashid al-shari’ah, this case intersects with four of the al-kulliyat al-khams (the five essentials): the preservation of religion (hifz al-din), life (hifz al-nafs), lineage (hifz al-nasl), and property (hifz al-mal), as an endeavor to mitigate harm and realize the welfare (maslahah) of humanity.
PROBLEMATIKA STREET PHOTOGRAPHY DALAM PERSPEKTIF ESTETIKA SENI DAN HUKUM HAK KEKAYAAN INTELEKTUAL Desy Sugianti; Miftah Ulumudin Tsani; Dedi Sugiyanto
Al-Adl : Jurnal Hukum Vol 18, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al Banjari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31602/al-adl.v18i1.22092

Abstract

This study examines street photography in Indonesia as a visual art practice that engages freedom of expression, ethical considerations, and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). Street photography functions not only as documentation of everyday life in public spaces but also as a medium for expressing social conditions, cultural dynamics, and urban life. Advances in digital technology and social media have facilitated the processes of image capture and dissemination, thereby increasing public access to street photography works. However, these developments have also generated legal and ethical issues. From a legal perspective, photographers hold copyright over photographic works as original creations, including both moral rights and economic rights. Nevertheless, street photography practices frequently involve photographing individuals without prior consent, which may give rise to issues concerning the right to privacy and the right to one’s image. These issues become more pronounced when photographs are used for commercial purposes or widely disseminated through digital media. This study employs a qualitative method with a normative–interpretative legal approach through the analysis of copyright regulations, legal concepts of privacy, and relevant literature. The findings indicate that the existence of public space does not eliminate the ethical responsibility of photographers. Although copyright resides with the photographer, respect for the rights and dignity of photographic subjects must be upheld. The study concludes that street photography practices in Indonesia require a balance between creative freedom, ethical awareness, and legal understanding in order to develop responsibly and sustainably.
ANALISIS NILAI KEADILAN PADA SYARAT PENAHANAN TERSANGKA DALAM PENYIDIKAN (PERBANDINGAN KUHAP 1981 DAN KUHAP 2025) Nisa Amalina Adlina
Al-Adl : Jurnal Hukum Vol 18, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al Banjari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31602/al-adl.v18i1.19049

Abstract

This study was conducted with two primary objectives. First, it examines the concept of justice in relation to the benchmark of investigators’ concerns used to assess and determine the detention of suspects under the subjective detention requirement stipulated in Article 21 paragraph (1) of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) of 1981. Second, it analyzes a comparative assessment of the value of justice embodied in the detention requirements for suspects under Article 21 paragraph (1) of the 1981 KUHAP and Article 93 paragraph (5) of the 2025 KUHAP. This research employs normative legal research, positioning law within a system of norms by referring to statutory regulations relevant to the subject matter. Data were collected through library research and analyzed using a descriptive-analytical approach by systematically presenting the issues and examining them in depth. The findings indicate that the value of justice inherent in the subjective detention requirement under Article 21 paragraph (1) of the 1981 KUHAP—specifically regarding circumstances that give rise to “concerns” that a suspect may abscond, destroy or remove evidence, and/or reoffend—is not aligned with the principle of equality before the law. In practice, this provision relies solely on the subjective assessment of the authorized investigator, thereby creating room for discriminatory treatment in determining whether suspects should be detained. The reform of the KUHAP through Law No. 20 of 2025 reflects an effort to enhance the value of justice by formulating more objective detention requirements under Article 93 paragraph (5) compared to Article 21 paragraph (1) of the 1981 KUHAP. Nevertheless, the reformed detention provisions still lack clear evaluative benchmarks and implementing regulations, which continues to allow investigative discretion in determining whether a suspect may be detained. Consequently, the value of justice has not yet been fully guaranteed.
MENEROPONG KEPASTIAN PENETAPAN STATUS TERSANGKA DALAM KUHAP BARU Erwin Susilo
Al-Adl : Jurnal Hukum Vol 18, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al Banjari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31602/al-adl.v18i1.18487

Abstract

The primary focus of this study is to examine the certainty of suspect status and case resolution at the pre-adjudication stage under the New Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). The research addresses two principal issues: first, the regulation of case resolution at the stages of investigation and prosecution under both the Old KUHAP and the New KUHAP; and second, the critique and reconstruction of pre-adjudication case resolution models necessary to prevent the recurrence of injustices that characterized the Old KUHAP regime. This study employs normative legal research using four approaches, namely statutory, conceptual, comparative, and case-based approaches. The findings reveal that although the New KUHAP has introduced a more structured coordination mechanism between Investigators and Public Prosecutors within the framework of an Integrated Criminal Justice System, it continues to exhibit legal lacunae. These shortcomings are evident in the absence of regulation concerning the legal consequences of exceeding the prescribed time limit for the initial examination of case files (Article 61), as well as the lack of clarity regarding the commencement point (dies a quo) for calculating the time period for case transfer to the court (Articles 70 and 75). Such conditions may result in the prolonged and uncertain status of suspects, thereby contravening the presumption of innocence, the principle of legal certainty (litis finiri oportet), and the principle of a speedy, simple, and cost-effective trial. This study recommends normative reconstruction through the harmonization of time-limit regulations, the clarification of legal consequences, and the strengthening of judicial oversight through pretrial mechanisms to ensure adequate legal protection for suspects.
MENGHADAPI TANTANGAN KEAMANAN SIBER PADA INFRASTRUKTUR KRITIS: SOLUSI HUKUM DAN ETIKA Ismail Darmawan; Muharman Lubis
Al-Adl : Jurnal Hukum Vol 18, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al Banjari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31602/al-adl.v18i1.19925

Abstract

In an increasingly advanced digital era, critical infrastructure underpins numerous aspects of human life, including energy, transportation, communications, and healthcare services. This paper delineates the principal challenges confronting cybersecurity in critical infrastructure, encompassing technological vulnerabilities, insufficient human resources, and inadequate regulatory frameworks. The research methodology involves an examination of applicable legislative regimes, with particular attention to Indonesia’s Electronic Information and Transactions Law (Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik/UU ITE) and the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The findings indicate that, although existing legal frameworks provide a robust foundation for combating cybercrime, regulatory modifications and enhancements remain necessary to address evolving threats. The study underscores the importance of collaboration between the public and private sectors in formulating effective cybersecurity strategies. It concludes that safeguarding critical infrastructure must be accorded priority and that an ethical approach to cybersecurity is essential for sustaining public trust.
REKONSTRUKSI PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM KREDITUR KONKUREN DALAM SISTEM KEPAILITAN INDONESIA: TELAAH KEADILAN DISTRIBUTIF DAN KEPASTIAN HUKUM Gilang Fitri Hermawan; Djoni Sumardi Gozali; Saprudin Saprudin
Al-Adl : Jurnal Hukum Vol 18, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Kalimantan Muhammad Arsyad Al Banjari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31602/al-adl.v18i1.20422

Abstract

This study aims to examine the legal standing of concurrent creditors within the Indonesian bankruptcy regime and to formulate a reconstruction model of legal protection that is more equitable without undermining legal certainty and efficiency. Concurrent creditors have traditionally occupied the lowest tier of priority, subordinate to secured and preferred creditors, resulting in the frequent marginalization of their rights. Employing normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, this study finds that the normative configuration of Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (UUK–PKPU) continues to place concurrent creditors in a weak and subordinated position. The practice of distributing bankruptcy estates further reveals the dominance of secured creditors, the expansion of preferential claims, limited transparency on the part of curators, and inconsistencies in judicial decisions, all of which undermine legal certainty and distributive justice for concurrent creditors. As a remedial measure, this study proposes a reconstruction of legal protection through the establishment of minimum rights for concurrent creditors, restrictions on secured creditors’ execution rights, reform of preferential mechanisms, enhancement of curator transparency, strengthening of judicial oversight, promotion of consistency in court decisions, and revision of the UUK–PKPU by incorporating best practices from bankruptcy systems in other jurisdictions. This reconstruction is expected to reinforce the position of concurrent creditors while simultaneously preserving legal certainty and efficiency within Indonesia’s bankruptcy law framework.

Page 28 of 28 | Total Record : 276

 24   25   26   27   28 

Filter by Year

2013 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 18, No 1 (2026) Vol 17, No 1 (2025) Vol 16, No 2 (2024) Vol 16, No 1 (2024) Vol 15, No 2 (2023) Vol 15, No 1 (2023) Vol 14, No 2 (2022) Vol 14, No 1 (2022) Vol 13, No 2 (2021) Vol 13, No 1 (2021) Vol 12, No 2 (2020) Vol 12, No 1 (2020) Vol 11, No 2 (2019) Vol 11, No 1 (2019) Vol 10, No 2 (2018) Vol 10, No 1 (2018) Vol 9, No 3 (2017) Vol 9, No 2 (2017) Vol 9, No 1 (2017) Vol 8, No 3 (2016) Vol 8, No 2 (2016) Vol 8, No 1 (2016) Vol 7, No 14 (2015) Vol 7, No 13 (2015) Vol 6, No 12 (2014) Vol 6, No 11 (2014) Vol 5, No 10 (2013) Vol 5, No 9 (2013) More Issue