Jurnal Hukum Adigama
Jurnal Hukum Adigama merupakan diseminasi (penyebarluasan) hasil penelitian, analisis putusan maupun kajian ilmiah konseptual dari mahasiswa beserta dengan pembimbingnya (Corresponding Author) yang terbit 2 (dua) kali dalam setahun yaitu pada bulan Juli dan Desember. Jurnal Hukum Adigama mencakup tulisan keilmuan dari segala Bidang Hukum, yaitu hukum pidana, hukum perdata, hukum internasional, hukum tata negara, dan hukum acara.
Articles
835 Documents
<![CDATA[PEMBEBANAN HIPOTEK ATAS KAPAL LAUT MENURUT UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 17 TAHUN 2008 TENTANG PELAYARAN (STUDI KASUS DI PT. X TAHUN 2020) ]]>
<![CDATA[Alifia Nashira]]>;
<![CDATA[Hanafi Tanawijaya]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 3, No 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v3i2.10572
<![CDATA[Shipping companies in the era of globalization are growing rapidly which causes shipping activities to also develop. This development makes the shipping sector require large capital to run its business. Ships as facilities and infrastructure for marine transportation and as objects that have economic value that can be used as collateral. To get a large capital requires assistance in the form of credit which is used to buy ships and can be used as collateral by charging a mortgage on the ship. Ship collateral is one of the material rights as collateral for debt repayment. In order for a ship to be subject to a mortgage, it must be registered at an Indonesian port and must be done with an authentic deed. The issue that will be discussed is regarding the process of loading a marine mortgage in accordance with law number 17 of 2008 concerning shipping and the consequences of this guarantee. The result of this research is that ships that are charged a mortgage will be issued a mortgage grosse deed. The grosse mortgage deed has the same executorial power as the court verdict which has permanent legal force. As a result of this guarantee, default may occur because the debtor does not fulfill the agreed performance. The occurrence of default is the same as bad credit that causes the ship to be towed. Then the ship will be executed with the creditors and through the auction agency.]]>
<![CDATA[IMPLEMENTASI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 30/PUU-XVI/2018 TERKAIT PELARANGAN JABATAN FUNGSIONARIS PARTAI POLITIK DALAM PENCALONAN ANGGOTA DPD ]]>
<![CDATA[Bima Krisna Bayu]]>;
<![CDATA[Rasji Rasji]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 4, No 1 (2021): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v4i1.12006
<![CDATA[One of the problems in Indonesian constitutionality is the issue of implementation, several questions arose when the Constitutional Court decision Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 was issued. In this decision, the Constitutional Court expanded the phrase "other work" as contained in Article 182 letter l of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning General Elections. Then, this also becomes a problem when someone submits a judicial review of the general election commission regulations regarding the prohibition of political party functionaries from running as members of the Regional Representative Council. Regarding this, the Supreme Court Decision 65P / Hum / 2018 emerged, which in its decision contradicts the previously published and binding Constitutional Court Decision. The purpose of this research is to determine the implementation of the Constitutional Court Decision. The method used by the author is an approach method based on main raw materials, examining matters relating to principles, conceptions, doctrines, and the legal system by using secondary data. The result of the research conducted by the author is that the difference in these decisions creates legal uncertainty and contradicts the theory of erga omnes which requires legal awareness from various parties.]]>
<![CDATA[ANALISIS HUKUM TERHADAP ASAS LEX SPECIALIS DEROGAT LEGI GENERALI PASAL 36 UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 42 TAHUN 1999 TENTANG JAMINAN FIDUSIA DALAM KASUS PENGGELAPAN ]]>
<![CDATA[Elsa Maharani]]>;
<![CDATA[Firman Wijaya]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 3, No 1 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v3i1.8910
<![CDATA[In the judiciary in Indonesia there are often criminal violations of fiduciary guarantees, one of which is regulated in Article 36 of Law Number 42 Year 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees. That Article has a relation on the basis of the principle of lex specialis derogat legi generali with Article 372 of the Criminal Code (KUHP). But as a lex specialis, fiduciary guarantees are often ruled out for application, as in the Purworejo District Court ruling number: 15 / Pid.Sus / 2015 / Pn.PWR. Then how is the application of article 36 of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law as lex specialis of Article 372 of the Criminal Code in the case in the decision? In this study, normative legal research methods will be used. The results of the research show that there was a mistake made by the Judge in making decisions related to the decision and the Prosecutor in prosecuting. This can be seen from the way the Judge and Prosecutor in examining the legal facts that exist. As a legal scholar, judges and prosecutors should pay more attention to the principles of applicable law and examine legal facts better.]]>
<![CDATA[KEABSAHAN HIBAH TANAH UNTUK KEPASTIAN HUKUM (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 652 K/Ag/2019) ]]>
<![CDATA[Mia Sumiati]]>;
<![CDATA[Endang Pandamdari]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 3, No 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v3i2.10610
<![CDATA[The problem on this case is that a land heirs that stole the portion of the other heirs by forging to take the land deeds that belongs to their other relatives to be named as one of the heirs, Marwan Efendi, based on the Grant Deeds that is made in front of PPAT Ida Kesuma and then its ownership to be transferred to Marwan Efendi, without the Plaintiff I,II, and III knowing, and the Defendant VII never signed that sale & purchase deeds, so in this case Marwan Efendi and PPAT Ida Kesuma had committed document falsification and signature to transfer the land rights through the Grant Deeds that’s inside (Study Towards Supreme Court Decision Number 652 K/ag/2019). Writer had done research on the case using Normative Legal Research Methods. Research data shows that there is an alliance between Marwan Efendi and PPAT Ida Kesuma whereas Meydalena (Defendant VII) never signed the SPD (Sale & Purchasing Deeds) between him/her and Marwan Efendi then has been cleared that in his excuse that he already give money and cars to the each Plaintiffs that is the heirs to the land, so in this case clearly against rule stated in article 1670 of KUHPerdata. By looking at the case it is better for someone to check the origin of the land so that nobody would suffer from it.]]>
<![CDATA[PENGUASAAN TANAH BEKAS HAK EIGENDOM VERPONDING SETELAH BERLAKUNYA UNDANG – UNDANG POKOK AGRARIA (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN MAKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR: 1401 K/Pdt/2018) ]]>
<![CDATA[Geraldus Sulianto]]>;
<![CDATA[Hanafi Tanawijaya]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 3, No 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v3i2.10577
<![CDATA[The ownership of the land of the former eigendom Verponding depending on rights by the residents is physical which after the enactment of the Basic Agrarian Law becomes state land which is then issued a certificate of building rights by PT. Asuransi Jiwasraya (Persero). How is the legal protection for residents who control the land which ex-eigendom depends rights physically after the enactment of the Basic Agrarian Law and which has been issued in the name of PT. Asuransi Jiwasraya (Persero)? Researchers examined these problems using normative legal research methods. In essence, research is carried out by examining library materials or secondary data consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and non-legal materials. The research data shows that there are weaknesses and legal errors from the application of these cases. This resulted in the land that had been controlled by residents for decades to change ownership to land owned by PT. Asuransi Jiwasraya (Persero), which residents should have priority rights to the land]]>
<![CDATA[ANALISIS PUTUSAN NOMOR 598 PK/PDT/2016 TERHADAP AKTA PERJANJIAN PERKAWINAN YANG TIDAK DICATATKAN DALAM DINAS TERKAIT ]]>
<![CDATA[Bonggas Prayipto]]>;
<![CDATA[Mulati Mulati]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 4, No 1 (2021): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v4i1.12012
<![CDATA[Marriage agreements that are made before a notary public but are not recorded at the related service office, the validity of the agreement is only binding on the parties making it, namely a married couple. This means that the marriage agreement becomes invalid and non-binding for a third party. The decision of the judicial review judge Number 598 PK / PDT / 2016 which states that marital assets obtained during marriage become joint assets that must be divided equally and equally in size is correct. The legal implication of a marriage agreement deed that is not registered with the relevant agency is that it does not reduce the legality of the parties making it. The marriage agreement remains valid for a married couple because of the agreement between the two parties as stipulated in Article 1320 of the Criminal Code regarding the validity of the agreement, namely the agreement. In the Marriage Law, there is no article that regulates or states that a new marriage agreement is valid if it has been registered or legalized, and is not binding for a third party, because the purpose of registration or registration at the related agency is to fulfill the element of publicity so that the third party is aware of the marriage agreement that has been signed. create a husband and wife pair so that in case of a legal incident the third party must comply with the marriage agreement that has been made.]]>
<![CDATA[GANTI RUGI BANGUNAN YANG DIDIRIKAN DIATAS TANAH SEWA MILIK PIHAK LAIN (STUDI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO.534/K/PDT/2016) ]]>
<![CDATA[Vitiamawan, Renaldo]]>;
<![CDATA[Pandamdari, Endang]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 3, No 1 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v3i1.8915
<![CDATA[In article 50 rule No. 1 of 2011 concerning building and Settlements reside or occupy the house while the right to inhabit the house can be: ownership or rent or not by way of rent, an agreement is an event wherein person promised for someone else or wherein the deuce people promised each other to carry out one thing. With such provisions it raises legal issues about how the compensation for buildings erected on land owned by another party (study of court decision angung No.534 / K / PDT / 2016)? Referring to that problem, the writer uses the actually everyone has the right to live or occupy the house, while the right to occupy the house can be: ownership or lease or not by leasing. However, an agreement must be made first based on statutory regulations, where the agreement made by verbally, in the case that the evidence must be witnessed by at least 2 people and the defendant cannot prove the truth of the rental agreement made verbally. thus it can be concluded that if you want to build a erect buildings on land not his, an agreement must be made first. The author suggests, if building a erect buildings on land not his, an agreement must be made first and it is better if the agreement is made in writing so that if problems occur, it can be used to defend the rights owned.]]>
<![CDATA[PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI DRIVER OJEK ONLINE TERHADAP PEMBATALAN SEPIHAK OLEH KONSUMEN YANG TIDAK BERITIKAD BAIK ]]>
<![CDATA[Sinthiarahma Felyna Megawati]]>;
<![CDATA[Amad Sudiro]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 3, No 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v3i2.10616
<![CDATA[Legal protection seeks to provide protection to parties whose rights and obligations have been harmed. The use of application-based online transportation is very much needed, the presence of Gojek with various services, one of which is Go-Food. Food delivery service for consumers. In its implementation, consumers who do not have good intentions occur when the food has been paid for. How is the legal protection for online motorcycle taxi drivers against unilateral cancellation by consumers who do not have good intentions based on law number 8 of 1999 concerning consumer protection? The author uses normative legal research methods and uses interview data as a support. The results of the study reveal that as drivers who experience losses due to the cancellation are entitled to legal protection and PT Gojek Indonesia as the application provider is also responsible for these losses even though the contents of the agreement have a transfer of responsibility. As a result, it is not clear which party can be responsible for the losses suffered by drivers. The explanation should have known the severe responsibility of the parties, which is clearly regulated in the partnership agreement between PT Gojek Indonesia and the driver which was made with mutual consent regarding the forms of responsibility and legal protection that drivers get.]]>
<![CDATA[PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KONSUMEN KORBAN KARTEL PRODUSEN KENDARAAN BERMOTOR YAMAHA-HONDA DALAM PERSPEKTIF UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 8 TAHUN 1999 TENTANG PERLINDUNGAN KONSUMEN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 04/KPPU-I/2016) ]]>
<![CDATA[Wahyu Alisa Putri]]>;
<![CDATA[Mariske Myeke Tampi]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 3, No 2 (2020): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v3i2.10583
<![CDATA[Competition in business is a common thing experienced by business actors, especially when healthy competition will have a positive impact and benefit consumers. Conversely, if it is done unhealthily and monoplically, it will have a negative impact that can harm consumers. One of the cases of unfair competition handled by the KPPU was the case of the Yamaha-Honda motorcycle cartel in the case of Decision Number 04 / KPPU-I / 2016. The decision is deemed not to protect consumers because the KPPU determines compensation to the state,not to consumers as the party who is injured by the cartel. KPPU does not have the function of protecting consumers for cartel victims because legally it is not under the authority of the KKPU, but under the authority of BPKN regarding consumer protection issues. The separation of the legal rules regarding business competition and consumer protection which results in the limitation of the KPPU's authority to be unable to carry out tasks beyond its authority, except those that have been regulated in law. The compensation mechanism for victims of the Yamaha-Honda cartel is through class action lawsuits and citizen lawsuits. However, this lawsuit is quite difficult to carry out because it reflects on the consumer's lawsuit in the case of decision Number 526 / Pdt.G / 2019 / PN.Jkt.Pst, of which many of the claims were broken due to difficulties in proving the losses suffered by each consumer.]]>
<![CDATA[URGENSI PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP WHISTLEBLOWER DALAM UPAYA PEMBERANTASAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI DI INDONESIA ]]>
<![CDATA[Nabila Azzahra]]>;
<![CDATA[Rugun Romaida Hutabarat]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal Hukum Adigama Vol 4, No 1 (2021): Jurnal Hukum Adigama ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Tarumanagara ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.24912/adigama.v4i1.12017
<![CDATA[Corruption is still a serious problem in Indonesia. This criminal act caused significant losses to state finances. Law enforcement for criminal acts of corruption done conventionally so far has proven to experience various disease resistance. Not a few cases have run aground in the middle of the road due to the absence of witnesses to support the duties of law enforcement officials. In its development, the term whistleblower is known as a criminal act of corruption. Assessed from a terminological perspective, a whistleblower is defined as someone who discloses a fact. In Indonesia whistleblower is a criminal act that reports and reports certain crimes and is not part of the crime it reports. In principle, whistleblowers can play a major role in exposing corrupt practices of public institutions. However, due to the lack of legal protection for whistleblowers in Indonesia, a whistleblower can be threatened physically, psychologically or at work because of his report or testimony of the allegations and crimes that have occurred. For this reason, in order for the practice of reporting and disclosing facts by whistleblowers to run more effectively, a concept of regulatory protection for whistleblowers in Indonesia is needed. As explained, this study aims to examine the form of legal protection for whistleblowers from a normative perspective and its implementation and also to study the practice of legal protection for whistleblowers in several countries to obtain the ideal legal protection concept for whistleblowers in Indonesia for the future.]]>
