Verstek
Jurnal Verstek is a peer-reviewed journal published by Procedural Law Department, Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret three times a year in April, August, and December. This Journal aims primarily to facilitate undergraduate students paper over current developments on procedural law issues in Indonesia as well as to publish innovative legal researches concerning Indonesian procedural laws and legal system. It provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to public support a greater global exchange of knowledge. The scope of the articles published in this journal deal with a broad range of topics in the fields of Procedural Law, included but not limited to legal construction of procedural law, critical construction of procedural law in practice, trends and changes in procedural law, and the technical challenges faced in proedural law.
Articles
24 Documents
Search results for
, issue
"Vol 5, No 2 (2017)"
:
24 Documents
clear
<![CDATA[Tinjauan Kasasi Penuntut Umum Atas Dasar Kesalahan Penerapan Hukum Judex Factie Dalam Perkara Lingkungan Hidup ]]>
<![CDATA[Aminatul Malihah]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (493.673 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33476
<![CDATA[ This research aims to determine the suitability of the reasons Cassation from Public Prosecutor based on Judex Factie (Court of Appeal) misapplied the law or enforce the rule of law is not as it should in the case of the environment with the provision of Article 253 paragraph (1) KUHAP juncto Article 116 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 32 Year 2009 on Protection and Management Environment. The reason Cassation from Public Prosecutor first is Judex Factie misapplied the Law Number 40 Year 2007 on Limited Company,which Judex factie only consider Article 98 paragraph (1) which states that “The Board of Directors to represent the Company both in and out of court”, without considering Article 103 which states that “The Board of Directors may authorize employees and the liability on behalf of the Company to take legal actions”. Case with defendant PT Karawang Prima Sejahtera Steel (PT KPSS), both the Directors and Commissioners were in China, so PT KPSS was led and managed by Wang Dong Bing as the Chief of General. The second reason Cassation from Public Prosecutor was in the indictment Public Prosecutor indicted PT KPSS as a Corporation which represented by Wang Dong Bing as the Chief of General, not Wang Dong Bing as a person, but the verdict in High Court Bandung Number 170/Pid.Sus/2012/PT.Bdg liberated Wang Dong Bing from the indictment Public Prosecutor. Both reasons Cassation justified by Judex Juris, so there is a suitability between the reason Cassation from Public Prosecutor with the provision of article 253 paragraph (1) KUHAP juncto Article 116 paragraph (1) letter a Law Number 32 Year 2009 on the Protection and Management Environment. Keyword: Cassation, Corporation, Environmental Crime This research aims to determine the suitability of the reasons Cassation from Public Prosecutor based on Judex Factie (Court of Appeal) misapplied the law or enforce the rule of law is not as it should in the case of the environment with the provision of Article 253 paragraph (1) KUHAP juncto Article 116 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 32 Year 2009 on Protection and Management Environment. The reason Cassation from Public Prosecutor first is Judex Factie misapplied the Law Number 40 Year 2007 on Limited Company, which Judex factie only consider Article 98 paragraph (1) which states that “The Board of Directors to represent the Company both in and out of court”, without considering Article 103 which states that “The Board of Directors may authorize employees and the liability on behalf of the Company to take legal actions”. Case with defendant PT Karawang Prima Sejahtera Steel (PT KPSS), both the Directors and Commissioners were in China, so PT KPSS was led and managed by Wang Dong Bing as the Chief of General. The second reason Cassation from Public Prosecutor was in the indictment Public Prosecutor indicted PT KPSS as a Corporation which represented by Wang Dong Bing as the Chief of General, not Wang Dong Bing as a person, but the verdict in High Court Bandung Number 170/Pid.Sus/2012/PT.Bdg liberated Wang Dong Bing fromthe indictment Public Prosecutor. Both reasons Cassation justified by Judex Juris, so there is a suitability between the reason Cassation from Public Prosecutor with the provision of article 253 paragraph (1) KUHAP juncto Article 116 paragraph (1) letter a Law Number 32 Year 2009 on the Protection and Management Environment. Keyword: Cassation, Corporation, Environmental Crime]]>
<![CDATA[Dasar Hukum Pengajuan Eksepsi Dengan Alasan Dakwaan Penuntut Umum Bersifat Prematur ]]>
<![CDATA[Ignas Ridlo Anarki]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (446.084 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33466
<![CDATA[ The aim of this research is to find out the suitablity between objection by reason that the public prosecutor charges is premature is in accordence with the provision of the book of the criminal procedure law. Considering the book of criminal procedure law only organize 3 (three) type of objection or exceptie (by holland). Based on article 156 clause (1) by the book of criminal procedure law, the 3 (three) type of objections are, the first is the court’s didn’t have the power to be competent to judge the case, the second is the prosecutor charges can’t be accepted, and the third is the prosecutor charges is null and void by the law. This research is normative legal research that tend to perspective and applicative, using the case approach. The case began when Dr. H. Baginda Parlaungan Ritonga died and left the legacy stored in the safe of PT. ARB, in the form of letters of agreement and deed of land, which hasn’t been divided into 12 (twelve) heirs. On december 27, 2014 evening, around 09.00 pm, the defendant Muhammad Tohir Ritonga invited defendent Samson Ritonnga to take the letters in the safe box with an assist by two locksmith without the knowledge of Mr. Muhammad Abdu Elif Ritonga as the person who manage the asssets of PT. ARB. On the court session, the defendant submit an objection (exceptie: holland), it’s said that the public prosecutor charges is premature, because on of the defendant, Mr.Muhammad Thohir Ritonga is one of the 12 (twelve) heirs to the legacy of Alm. Dr. H. Baginda Parlaungan Ritonga. So they still needed another verdict on the inheritence to find out who was to inherit the lagacy and to decide whether the two defendent has committed theft or not Based on the results of the research and study, the conclusions generated that the offer of objection by the defendant by reason that the public prosecutor charges is premature is in accordance with the provision of the book of the criminal procedure law. Keywords: prejudicial, charges, objection or exceptie (by holland)]]>
<![CDATA[Dasar Pertimbangan Hukum Hakim Menjatuhkan Putusan Lepas Dari Segala Tuntutan Hukum Terdakwa Dalam Perkara Penipuan ]]>
<![CDATA[Syarifah Dewi Indawati]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (540.172 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33500
<![CDATA[ Research was to determine the conformity consideration the judge of Denpasar District Superior Court in releasing the defendant from any lawsuit in fraudulence cases with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code. Based on the research and resulting conclusions set forth discussion, basis consideration the judge in drop down the Verdict Loose From the Guilt in case Number: 24/PID/2015.PT.DPS that the judge in deciding the case based on the facts revealed at courts by examine some of the evidence and the existence of agreements which conducted by both parties beforehand that payment terms of purchase agreement within range Two (2) months, which can not be interpreted as fraudulence so that a legal relationship well built are the legal relationship of civil not a legal relationship of penal law, so the judge believes that factors existing in Article 378 which the basis Public Prosecutor demands not completely fulfilled. Keywords: Loose From the Guilt, An Appeal, Basis Consideration Of The Judge.]]>
<![CDATA[Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Lingkungan Hidup Pembakaran Lahan Secara Berlanjut ]]>
<![CDATA[Hudoyo, Ardhi Wikanto]]>;
<![CDATA[Yulianti, S,H., M.H, Sri Wahyuningsih]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (344.878 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33456
<![CDATA[      This research aims is to determine the suitability of proof in environmental crime with article 96 of Law No. 32 of 2009 on the Protection and Management of the Environment and Article 184 paragraph (1) letter b of the Criminal Procedure Code, this is a normative law research or commonly called the doctrinal legal research done by researching library materials or secondary data consists of primary legal materials, secondary law and tertiary legal materials. Primary legal materials consist of legislation, notes the official records, the minutes in the making of legislation and the decision of the judge's decision.      As for the secondary law in the form of all the publicity about the law which is not an official document. The results of the research explaining that the Power of the evidence in the Supreme Court decision No. 131 / Pid.B / 2013 / PN.MBO dated July 15, 2014 in accordance with the provisions of article 96 of Law No. 32 of 2009 on the Protection and Management of the Environment and Article 184 paragraph ( 1) b Criminal Code because the evidence presented is not considered by the panel of judges that includes expert testimony and other evidence. So the judges gave fines to the defendant for the sanction.       Keywords: Evidence, Environmental Criminal]]>
<![CDATA[Tinjauan Kasasi Penuntut Umum Atas Dasar Salah Menjatuhkan Sanksi Pidana Oleh Judex Factie Dalam Perkara Illegal Fishing ]]>
<![CDATA[Setyono, Hanindito Arfebi]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (451.784 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33488
<![CDATA[     This research aims to determine whether the submission of Cassation Prosecutor General with reasons Judex factie wrong to impose criminal sanctions in accordance with Article 253 Criminal Procedure Code. This type of research used by the authors to draw up legal research are doctrinal legal research.  The author uses the approach of the case (case approach), that is by doing research on cases pertaining who already have permanent legal force. Legal materials analysis techniques used by the author is to use legal reasoning by deduction.      The basis of this illegal fishing case, Judex Factie one drop criminal sanctions to the Defendant Jerry S. Deodor Philippine nationality who only gave sanction penalties imprisonment for 1 (one) year lighter than the primary demands of the Public Prosecutor, which is 3 (three) years, lighter prison where criminal sanctions will not provide a deterrent effect against perpetrators of illegal fishing areas of the Pacific Ocean fishery management area of the Republic of Indonesia. Not satisfied with the decision handed down by Judex factie, the Public Prosecutor fi led a cassation to the Supreme Court on the grounds Judex Factie any criminal sanctions and do not provide a deterrent effect to the perpetrators of the illegal fishing. For that reason, the Supreme Court granted the appeal filed Public Prosecutor. Based on research conducted by the author, the obtained results that associated with the submission of Cassation Public Prosecutor with reasons Judex Factie one drop criminal sanctions in the case of Illegal Fishing in accordance with the provisions contained in Article 253 paragraph (1) letter a Criminal Procedure Code.    Keywords: Filing Cassation Public Prosecutor, misapply Sanctions Criminal, Illegal Fishing]]>
<![CDATA[Tinjauan Kasasi Mahmakah Agung Atas Dasar Tidak Diterapkannya Hukum Sebagaimana Mestinya Oleh Judex Factie Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi ]]>
<![CDATA[Fairuza Irfany]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (465.885 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33470
<![CDATA[ Corruption is a problem that needs to be addressed seriously and is a legal issue in every country in the world, including Indonesia. Disease is increasingly rampant corruption. The government's seriousness in tackling corruption, namely the establishment of Law No. 31 of 1999 as amended by Act No. 20 of 2001 on Corruption Eradication. This type of research that the authors used in preparing this legal research is research doctrinal law, therefore use case approach (case approach) that is carried out by way of review of cases relating to issues that face which has become a court decision which has had the power fixed. Legal materials analysis techniques used by the author is to use legal reasoning by deduction. Issues raised are granting an appeal by the Supreme Court on the grounds Judex factie not apply the law properly in corruption. The defendant unlawfully enrich themselves or another person or a corporation that could harm the state finance and economy, conducted by Muhammad Said Madiu a way to misuse of money at. Trading Company Indonesia (PPI) Branch Gorontalo done by billing without SPP documents and invoices, but by making their own receipts, causing losses to the state amounting to Rp516.495.000,00 (five hundred and sixteen million four hundred and ninety-five thousand rupiah ). The conclusion of this study explained that the granting of an appeal by the Supreme Court is in conformity with Article 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code, namely when the Supreme Court granted the request for cassation, the Supreme Court overturned the verdict of the court filed an appeal. This study explains that the basic decision-making Supreme Court judges who change the High Court Gorontalo Number: 06 / PID.SUS.TIPIKOR / 2014 / PT.Gtlo compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Supreme Court Decision No. 1818 K / Pid.Sus / 2014 imposing sanctions of imprisonment and fines were appropriate and proper because it contains elements of a good decision. Keywords: Supreme Court of Cassation granting , Judex factie Not Implementing Law , Corruption. ]]>
<![CDATA[Kasasi Atas Dasar Judex Facti Salah Menerapkan Hukum Dalam Perkara Kesusilaan Oleh Anggota Militer ]]>
<![CDATA[Ghazi Leomuwafiq]]>;
<![CDATA[Kristiyadi, S,H., M.Hum -]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (172.171 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33460
<![CDATA[ This Research aim is to find out the suitability of the the appeal on the basis missaplied the law in the case of decency by members of the military with Act No. 31 of 1997 on the military Judiciary. The research method used was the normative legal research that is both prescriptive and applied. The approach used is case approach. The case of decency committed by Mayor Rudy Chb Pamungkas Santoso is members of the military have been terminated with the decision of a court martial II jakarta Number 13-K/PMT-II/CE/V/2012 pidan prison sentence by dropping the 7 (seven) months and additional criminal was dismissed from the service of the milter. Against the verdict of the appeal which is then terminated with a military court ruling Jakarta Main number: 17-K/PMTU/BDG/AD/VII/2014 that freeing the defendants for not proving to legally perform criminal acts of decency. A military judge advocate then apply for cassation with reasons judex facti wrong applying the law. The filing of the appeal by the Military judge advocate accepted by the Supreme Court with the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Number 45 k/MIL/2015, which cancels the previous ruling. Based on research can be concluded on the basis of Cassation submissions wrongly applied the law was in accordance with the provisions article 239 of law No. 31 of 1997. So the filing of Cassation on the basis of acceptable law wrongly. Key word: Cassation, Morality, Military Members]]>
<![CDATA[Argumentasi Hukum Penuntut Umum Menyusun Dakwaan Tunggal Dalam Perkara Pencurian Dengan Kekerasan ]]>
<![CDATA[Surya Guritno]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (278.974 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33494
<![CDATA[ Purpose of research to the public prosecutor's argument arrange single indictment in the case of theft with violence resulting in death where Justice in its advisory opinion against the defendants acquitted in the case number: 817 / Pid.B / 2013 / PN.Smg. The criminal act of theft had occurred on Sunday, October 27, 2013 approximately at 03.30.wib at Jl. Dr. Wahidin Semarang. Defendant I and Defendant II rob her purse and pushed fall off her motorbike death as a result. The crime of theft with violence that law argumentations of public prosecutor compile singular conformity with Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), in this case the Prosecutor General shall establish the charges under Article 143 paragraph (2) Criminal Procedure Code. On the other hand is based on a system of verifying negative verdict Judge-free for non-fulfillment of the minimum threshold of proof as provided for in Article 191 paragraph (1) Criminal Code, the judge is legally inappropriate and unreasonable to acquit the defendants of all charges and demands of the public prosecutor. Keywords: Law Argumentations, Indictment, The Judge Considerations. ]]>
<![CDATA[Upaya Gugatan Perlawanan Debitur Untuk Membatalkan Penjualan Lelang Objek Hak Tanggungan ]]>
<![CDATA[Grafita Aji Parama Bhakti]]>;
<![CDATA[Zakki Adhiliyati, S.H., M.H., LL.M]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33462
<![CDATA[ This study aims to determine the suitability of the consideration of judges with law No. 4 of 1996 About security rights in decisions to attempt resistance lawsuit to cancel the auction sale of the debtor object security rights. The method used in this paper is a normative prescriptive and applied. The approach used is a case approach. Sources of legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials, with materials analysis techniques that are legal syllogism deductive method. Case originated from PT. BANK MEGA Tbk Cq. BANK MEGA Branch of Magelang as creditor who has tendered against the collateral of the debtor named Ahmad Zuhri of 1 (one) parcels of land and buildings, following everything that stands on it. But the tender process was delayed due to a lawsuit opposition from the debtor, whereas a settlement through legal institutions in practice would be detrimental to the debtor because it takes time, cost and effort is not small, as well as the interest to be paid to the creditors will continue to accumulate during the judicial process ongoing. Creditors will also be harmed because they do not immediately get the repayment of debt as a result of the execution process convoluted in court. Based on research, it can be concluded the judges stated that the execution of the security rights is legitimate and in accordance with article 20 of Law No. 4 of 1996 concerning security rights, and rejected the lawsuit filed by the debtor resistance. Keywords: Creditors, Debtors, Security rights]]>
<![CDATA[Hasil Pemeriksaan Laboratorium Forensik Terhadap Tulang Kerangka Sebagai Salah Satu Alat Bukti Surat ]]>
<![CDATA[Benny Haninta Surya]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 2 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i2.33484
<![CDATA[ Skeleton founded case in Pinang Sebatang Timur Village, Tualang, Siak by law enforcement officer with any help from expert had been discovered a fact which said that the skeleton were had been found is a human bone, and then law enforcement officer found another facts and evidences that leading to the murderer case. with further examination with evidence both have found by the law enforcement officerand the Visum et Repertum examination on skeleton result by the expert, Dita Desmala Sari, the defendant then applied a Planned Murder Crime by the judge. The result shows that first the result of forensic laboratory in skeleton examination is a evidence made from knowledge and examination by Expert, precisely Forensic Expert or Medical Expert Judiciary, but it’s categorized in a documentary evidence based on Article 184 (1) KUHAP jo. Article187 letter c KUHAP. Second, the result of forensic laboratory in skeleton examination considered by the judges as one of the valuation from the unsure on the Planned Murder Crime and also being Judges “Conviction Adder” to give Death Punishment for the defendant based on his fault which rated too nasty for a human being and absolutely cannot be tolerated anymore has been matched to Article 183 jo. Article 193 (1) of KUHAP. Keywords: Forensic Laboratory, Evidence, Planned Murder Crime]]>
