cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Fachrudin Sembiring
Contact Email
fachrudin.sembiring@atmajaya.ac.id
Phone
+628129551194
Journal Mail Official
paradigma.hukum@atmajaya.ac.id
Editorial Address
Gedung C Lantai 3 Jl. Jend. Sudirman No.51, RT.5/RW.4, Karet Semanggi, Kecamatan Setiabudi, Kota Jakarta Selatan, Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta 12930
Location
Kota adm. jakarta selatan,
Dki jakarta
INDONESIA
Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan
Published by Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya
ISSN : 25287486     EISSN : 26549298     DOI : https://doi.org/10.25170/paradigma.v5i02
Core Subject : Humanities, Social,
Humanities Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan diterbitkan sesuai standar akreditasi dan dimaksudkan untuk memenuhi kebutuhan publikasi karya ilmiah bidang hukum yang pada akhir ini sulit ditemukan. Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan memuat hasil kegiatan penelitian, pemikiran konseptual, dan resensi buku bidang hukum. Media komunikasi ini diterbitkan oleh Fakultas Hukum Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya, Jakarta. Terbit perdana April 2016 dengan siklus terbit dua kali setahun. Naskah artikel yang diterima berupa laporan penelitian, pemikiran konseptual, dan resensi buku bidang hukum sepanjang relevan dengan misi redaksi dan belum pernah dipublikasikan.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 145 Documents
 11   12   13   14   15 
Reconciling Progressive Personal Status Regulations with Domestic Public Policy: An Indonesian Paradigm for Cross-Border Adoption Involving Transgender Parents putri purbasari raharningtyas; Ali Ridho
Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol. 11 No. 2 (2026): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN – AGUSTUS 2026
Publisher : Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25170/paradigma.v11i2.8127

Abstract

Intercountry child adoption is a highly complex private international law matter involving jurisdictional conflicts, divergent national legal systems, and the protection of child rights. This study examines the current legal framework governing intercountry adoption in Indonesia, compares it with the German legal system and the 1993 Hague Convention, and proposes an implementation timeline and an ideal regulatory model under the Draft Private International Law Act (RUU HPI), along with its realization timeline. The research method employed is a normative juridical couple using statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches, and analyzing a concrete case of a transgender cross-border couple. The analysis demonstrates that the current sectoral and rigid adoption regulations, which still rely on the Dutch colonial legacy (Algemene Bepalingen van Wetgeving - AB), are no longer adequate to resolve modern cross-border disputes. The comparison with Germany highlights collisions in recognizing the personal status of transgender adoptive parents and the validity of mixed marriages. This study concludes that the enactment of RUU HPI, particularly Articles 13, 35, and 36, offers an ideal regulatory model that adaptively synthesizes the 1993 Hague Convention standards by prioritizing the best interest of the child and the habitual residence principle without compromising domestic public policy.
The Legal Status of Refugees as Perpetrators of Criminal Acts in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System diva pitaloka
Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol. 11 No. 2 (2026): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN – AGUSTUS 2026
Publisher : Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25170/paradigma.v11i2.8238

Abstract

The presence of foreign refugees in Indonesia raises various legal issues, one of which is when refugees commit crimes within Indonesian territory. Although Indonesia has not ratified the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, refugee management remains guided by Presidential Regulation Number 125 of 2016 concerning the Management of Refugees from Abroad and applicable national legal provisions. This study aims to analyze the legal status of refugees as perpetrators of crimes within the Indonesian criminal justice system and examine the forms of criminal liability that can be imposed on them. The study uses a normative juridical method with a statutory, conceptual, and case approach. The legal materials used include laws and regulations, international legal instruments, scientific literature, and relevant court decisions. The results show that refugee status does not eliminate criminal liability for crimes committed within Indonesian territory. Refugees remain subject to national criminal law provisions based on the territorial principle. However, there is no comprehensive regulation regarding the handling mechanism for refugee perpetrators of criminal acts, particularly regarding coordination between law enforcement officials, immigration authorities, and international organizations. This situation has the potential to create legal uncertainty in the law enforcement process and in determining refugee status after serving a sentence. Therefore, harmonization of national regulations with the principles of international refugee law is necessary to ensure legal certainty, human rights protection, and the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in Indonesia.
Restorative Justice versus Retributive Justice: Exploring Child Abuse Cases in Indonesia muhammad havez
Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol. 11 No. 2 (2026): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN – AGUSTUS 2026
Publisher : Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25170/paradigma.v11i2.8258

Abstract

Law enforcement of child abuse cases in Indonesia presents complex challenges, particularly in determining the most effective justice approach for both victims and perpetrators. This article compares Restorative Justice and Retributive Justice in handling child abuse cases, focusing on their impact on victim rehabilitation, deterrent effects on perpetrators, and protection for victims. Restorative Justice, which focuses on restoring relationships between victims and perpetrators, can accelerate the rehabilitation process and reduce long-term trauma for victims. Conversely, Retributive Justice, which prioritizes punishment for perpetrators and aims to provide a deterrent effect, often neglects the aspect of recovery for victims. This article also explores the social and psychological impacts experienced by victims depending on the approach used, as well as the challenges faced by the Indonesian legal system in effectively implementing Restorative Justice in child abuse cases. By understanding these two approaches, it is hoped that more comprehensive solutions can be found in handling child abuse cases in Indonesia.
JUDICIAL CONSIDERATION OF THE DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION IN DECISION NO. 46/PDT.SUS-PHI/2023/PN SBY Ananda Chrisna D. Panjaitan; Frederica Celia Suwono; Ielien Dorothy Abigail; Ni Made Anggi Dwita Maharani
Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol. 11 No. 2 (2026): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN – AGUSTUS 2026
Publisher : Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25170/paradigma.v11i2.8299

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the judges’ considerations regarding the defendant’s exceptions in a civil case through a case study of Decision No. 46/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2023/PN Sby. Therefore, the author raises a legal issue concerning the impact of errors in stating the identities of the parties in a lawsuit, as well as the status of the land and building under SHM No. 352 as an object of conservatory attachment. This research employs a normative juridical method using a statutory and case approach. The findings indicate that the panel of judges granted several exceptions raised by the defendant, namely error in persona and obscuur libel. The court determined that the plaintiff’s claim contained formal defects. Consequently, the claim was declared inadmissible (niet ontvankelijk verklaard). This decision is consistent with the Supreme Court jurisprudence No. 601 K/Sip/1975 concerning the misidentification of a defendant and No. 81 K/Sip/1971 concerning the clarity of the object of a land dispute. The study demonstrates that, within the framework of civil procedural law, exceptions play an essential role as an initial mechanism for determining whether a claim is sufficiently proper to proceed to further judicial examination. Furthermore, the findings emphasize the importance of exercising greater precision when drafting a statement of claim, particularly with regard to the identities of the parties and the subject matter of the dispute, so that a claim is not dismissed merely due to formal defects.  
Judicial Flexibility in Imposing Sentences Below The Special Minimum Following The Recodification of The National Criminal Code: An Analysis of Sentencing Guidelines and Judicial Discretion Rahmahwati Silvia Riani; Titin Nurfatlah
Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol. 11 No. 2 (2026): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN – AGUSTUS 2026
Publisher : Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25170/paradigma.v11i2.8300

Abstract

The enactment of Law Number 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana/KUHP) represents a significant development in the reform of Indonesian criminal law and the evolution of the national legal system. The new Criminal Code reinforces the principle of legality, which provides that no person may be held criminally liable or punished for an act unless such act has been clearly regulated by legislation. This study employs normative legal research using a statutory approach. The data used consist of secondary legal materials, including primary legal materials in the form of relevant legislation and secondary legal materials comprising previous studies and judicial decisions in which judges imposed sentences below the special statutory minimum in corruption cases.This study examines judicial flexibility in imposing sentences below the special minimum following the recodification of the National Criminal Code. The sentencing guidelines stipulated in Article 54 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Criminal Code should be understood as guidelines oriented toward a rehabilitative and restorative approach, with the aim of facilitating the improvement of offenders following the commission of a criminal offense. Nevertheless, these provisions should not be interpreted as granting judges unrestricted authority to impose sentences below a statutory special minimum. Rather, the sentencing guidelines serve as a framework for judges in adjudicating criminal cases in order to minimize excessive sentencing disparities while taking into account not only the defendant's degree of culpability but also humanitarian considerations, including the defendant's motives, objectives, state of mind, the consequences of the offense, and the response of society. Judicial flexibility following the recodification of the National Criminal Code remains necessary to realize substantive justice in sentencing. Nevertheless, such flexibility must be exercised in a measurable and reasoned manner and remain within the framework of the principle of legality. Judicial flexibility should therefore not be understood as unrestricted authority, but rather as the legally recognized scope within which judges may determine the type and severity of punishment that is most proportionate to the circumstances of the case and the sentencing guidelines set forth in Article 54 of the Criminal Code.  

Page 15 of 15 | Total Record : 145

 11   12   13   14   15 

Filter by Year

2016 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 11 No. 2 (2026): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN – AGUSTUS 2026 Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN – FEBRUARI 2026 Vol. 10 No. 2 (2025): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN - AGUSTUS 2025 Vol. 10 No. 1 (2025): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN - FEBRUARI 2025 Vol. 9 No. 2 (2024): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN - AGUSTUS 2024 Vol. 9 No. 1 (2024): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN - FEBRUARI 2024 Vol. 8 No. 2 (2023): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN - AGUSTUS 2023 Vol. 8 No. 1 (2023): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN - FEBRUARI 2023 Vol 7 No 1 (2022): JURNAL PARADIGMA HUKUM PEMBANGUNAN - FEBRUARI 2022 Vol 6 No 02 (2021): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 6 No 1 (2021): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum dan Pembangunan Vol 5 No 02 (2020): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 5 No 01 (2020): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 4 No 02 (2019): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol. 4 No. 01 (2019): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 4 No 01 (2019): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 3 No 03 (2018): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 3 No 02 (2018): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 3 No 01 (2018): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 2 No 03 (2017): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 2 No 02 (2017): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 2 No 01 (2017): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 1 No 03 (2016): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 1 No 02 (2016): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan Vol 1 No 01 (2016): Jurnal Paradigma Hukum Pembangunan More Issue