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
23 Documents
Search results for
, issue
"Vol 5, No 3 (2017)"
:
23 Documents
clear
<![CDATA[Formulasi Kumulasi Gugatan Yang Dibenarkan Tata Tertib Acara Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Kidung Sadewa]]>;
<![CDATA[Heri Hartanto, S.H., M.H]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (449.901 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33546
<![CDATA[ The aim of this research is to understanding the cumulative claim based on Indonesian civil procedural law by analyzing two verdict of supreme court since no civil procedural rule that prohibit cumulative claim. This is prescriptive doctrinal or normative research with the case approach, this research use the primary law sources and secondary law sources as legal source. The technique of collecting legal material in this research use library research and use inductive method as the technique of analyzing legal material. The unpresent of rule in Indonesian civil procedural law that prohibit cumulative claim inevitablely permit cumulation claim. However in practice, there is a contradiction of two supreme court’s verdicts which are verdict number 2157 K/Pdt/2012 that permit cumulative claim and verdict number 571 PK/PDT/2008 that prohibit cumulative claim. According to two analyzed verdicts, it can be acquired that permitted cumulative claim formulation in Indonesian civil procedural law required close connection, legal connection and consistency at the claim. Keywords: Onrechtmatige Daad, Tort, Cumulative Claim]]>
<![CDATA[Upaya Hukum Kasasi Penuntut Umum Atas Dasar Pembatalan Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Oleh Pengadilan Tinggi Dalam Kasus Tindak Pidana Narkotika ]]>
<![CDATA[Afrizal Nur Fauzi]]>;
<![CDATA[Kristiyadi, S,H., M.Hum -]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (167.85 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33514
<![CDATA[ This research aims is to find out the public prosecutor's appeal on the basis of the cancellation of Malang District Court Number 146/Pid.Sus/2014/PN.Mlg by the High Court of Surabaya with decision Number 364/Pid.Sus/2014/PT.SBY in criminal cases narcotics. In the case that I researched, the public prosecutor filed an appeal on the basis of Surabaya High Court had misapplied the law. The method used is a normative legal research. The approach used is the approach of legislation and conceptual approaches. Sources of legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials. In this study, it has been known that the reason cassation prosecutor in narcotic cases on the basis of the cancellation of the decision of the District Court of Surabaya Malang by the High Court in accordance with the provisions of Article 253 the Code of Criminal Procedure Indonesia which according to Indonesia Supreme Court of Justice that High Court of Surabaya has missaplied the law in its decision about the mistakes made by the defendant is not without the right to sell, but as abusers of narcotics. Keywords: Cassation, Cancellation Decision, Crime Narcotics]]>
<![CDATA[Dasar Hukum Penuntut Umum Mengajukan Kasasi Terhadap Putusan Lepas Dari Segala Tuntutan Hukum Dalam Perkara Penggelapan Dalam Jabatan Secara Berlanjut ]]>
<![CDATA[Alfian Nanung Pradana]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (478.767 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33536
<![CDATA[ The purpose of this research is to know the legal status of the public prosecutor in filing appeal against matters of embezzlement in Office continuously charged with Article 64 paragraph (1) Jo. Article 32 of the Criminal Code. This study discusses the embezzlement in Office continuously conducted Sharif Muda Siregar, S.E., West. The Act of the defendant that is several times has been taking money from the Treasurer of the school which should belong to the Foundation and use it for the benefit of outside Islamic College Foundation's interests rather than "Nurul Ilmi" educational institutions BM Muda Padangsidempuan which totals Rp 33.779.500 RP (thirty-three million seven hundred seventy-nine thousand five hundred rupiah). On that basis the Sharif Muda Siregar, S.E., West., was tried in the District Court of Padangsidempuan. District Court defendant innocent Padangsidempuantermination on the basis of the consideration of the Tribunal is Judge because it found the existence of reasons of forgiving so that the Act of the defendant be delete/missing altogether. The results showed that the legal basis for the public prosecutor in asking the StateCourt judge of Cassation is Padangsidempuan misinterpret elements against the law contained in article 372 of the Criminal Code so as to categorize the Act of the defendant as the Act by reason of forgiving (overmacht). The public prosecutor filed an appeal over the decision of a District Court and granted by Padangsidempuan Supreme Court approved the reasons of Cassation Prosecutor that State Court Padangsidempuan misinterpreted law. Keywords: appeal, the verdict, Prosecutor General, Supreme Court]]>
<![CDATA[Pengajuan Kasasi Penuntut Umum Atas Alasan Ketidakcermatan Penilaian Hakim Terhadap Fakta Hukum Di Persidangan Perkara Penggelapan Dalam Jabatan ]]>
<![CDATA[Bimo Adhi Nugroho]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (466.442 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33526
<![CDATA[ The Purpose of this research is to understand Prosecutor’s appeal in cassation on the grounds of judge’s misinterpretation in office embezzlement case (Study Of the decision of the Supreme Court Number: 413 K/Pid./2013). This criminal act “embezzlement case” happened when the defendant be officer in PT. Sejahtera Agro Perkasa at Ancol VII/3 Ancol Barat Street, North Jakarta. The Defedant embezzle company money which trusted to him dan used for online soccer gambling. then the judges of north Jakarta district court release The Defedant from all lawsuits because the judge’s opinion, this case confirm in private law case. For this crimal act “office embezzlement” and this verdict from judge’s of north Jakarta Court district,Public Presecutor submit cassation legal effort and refer article 253 of criminal procedure code. In other side The Supreme Court considering law which used for check and decide the law to finish this case based in legitimate and reason manners, in grant cassation legal recourse from public prosecutor based on criminal procedure code. Keywords: Legal Recourse, Cassation, and office embezzlement]]>
<![CDATA[Kedudukan Saksi Yang Mempunyai Hubungan Darah Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Penculikan Anak/Bayi ]]>
<![CDATA[Jati, Leonardo]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (448.128 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33548
<![CDATA[    Research discussed do self defense the defendant by asking sister of as a witness a de charge in of crimes kidnapping children/of infants have in accordance with the article 65 jo verse 168 KUHAP, second do filing witness a de charge considered the judge in dropped decisions criminal against the defendant the kidnapping children/of infants have in accordance with the article 183 jo verse 193 paragraph (1) KUHAP.   The defendant seek for information about posedur adoption kid to the hospital dr. soeselo slawi, but the defendant having an intention to take of infants that did not in fail by their parents. After the baby be in his hand they go home with a view it their own.     The kind of research using research normative that is prespektif and applied, and used the cases.The results of the study: (1)is in accordance with article 65 KUHAP the defendant has the right to lodge witness a de a charge; but not in accordance with article 168 KUHAP the sister of not allowed witness. (2)filing witness a de charge in considerataion of the judges are not considered as sisterof must not be a witness,,while consideration the judges in droped the award hasin accordance with article 183 jo verse 193 paragraph (1) KUHAP, Having been paying at least two evidence legitimate and court thought the defendant guilty criminal charged him     Keywords: witness a de a charge; kidnapping children / baby]]>
<![CDATA[Alasan Kasasi Oleh Penuntut Umum Dalam Perkara Penggelapan Pada Hubungan Kerja Secara Berlanjut ]]>
<![CDATA[A, Almarindra]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (394.177 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33516
<![CDATA[    The aim of this research is to determine the suitability of legal arguments Supreme Court granted defendant's appeal in embezzlement case in the employment relationship continues with article 253 the Code of Criminal Procedure. The purpose of this study was to determine why the appeal by the Public Prosecutor and the consideration of Supreme Court judges in examining and deciding cases of embezzlement in office. Public Prosecutor considered that the judge misapplied the law to break the embezzlement case. based on the legal facts revealed in advance the trial turns out three evidences of a parcel of land and cash clearly derived from criminal acts committed by the defendant, and the absence of good faith the defendant to reimburse to the CV. Surya Prima Kertak Hanyar of total losses of Rp 1,213,596,000.00 (one billion two hundred and thirteen million five hundred ninety six thousand rupiah). Embezzlement in a continuing employment relationship is not a new thing in the community. Mode like this generally occurs within the scope of families, companies, and institutions in general.    The results show that the facts and the evidence revealed the defendant had to account for his actions, according handed down by Judge to undergo imprisonment for four years. The reason of prosecutor appeal has qualified the qualification accordance with the provisions of Article 253 Criminal Procedure Code, by Judex factie otherwise there was an error regarding the evidence which is returned to the defendant that it is does not reflect the sense of justice that exist in society in general and very wounding taste justice for the victim witness namely CV. Surya Prima Kertak Hanyar. Overall consideration of the Supreme Court Judges examine and decide an appeal within the Public Prosecutor in the case of embezzlement in office in accordance with Article 256 Juncto Article 193 paragraph (1) Criminal Procedure Code. Grant the petition of appeal and cancel the earlier court decision.      Keywords: Embezzlement, Cassation Reasons, Returns Evidence]]>
<![CDATA[Analisis Yuridis Tentang Pembuktian Dakwaan Dengan Saksi-Saksi Yang Dibacakan Oleh Penuntut Umum Dalam Pemeriksaan Perkara Penggelapan Dalam Jabatan ]]>
<![CDATA[Yuni Widayanti]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (590.6 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33542
<![CDATA[ The case of embezzlement with the dependent Bagus Pritono Aji do abuse of the authority to do billing money to Hengki Hendra as the owner of the shop Jumbo Digital with the use of an invoice made UD.Denka Elektrindo. Without permission from other people, the money used for the sake of personal defendants. Central Jakarta Court dropped the felony to the decided to sent the defendant to jail for 1 (one) year . The results of the research show that in the process of proving the charges, the Prosecutor can't present witnesses so the judge asked the Prosecutor to read from the witness discription. To prove the allegations by witnesses that was read by the prosecutor on a case of embezzlement in the department is not in accordance with the terms of the Criminal Procedure Code, because according to the terms of Article 185 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code mentioned that witnesses as a means of evidence is what the witness stated in court. Witnesses is carried out by the public prosecutor considered by the Judge with the stipulation that the witnesses-the witness has conformity with the statements of the accused as well as the device evidence the invoice billing. The testimony was read by a prosecutor that in this case the judge also come under consideration because it can be made a tool of evidence clues that can lead to the conviction of a judge in a cut scene in accordance with Article 183 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Key words : Embezzlement for practicing, Evidence, Witness]]>
<![CDATA[Penggunaan Alat Bukti Keterangan Saksi A Charge Dalam Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Penipuan Tenaga Kerja ]]>
<![CDATA[Ignasius Ninorey]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (192.582 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33532
<![CDATA[ The purpose of research are, first whether the use of evidence of a charge witness description in criminal fraud towards manpower in accordance with the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, second whether of a charge witness description in criminal fraud investigation towards manpower be considered by the judge. This is normative research with case approach. Data collection technique include study of literature, use of deductive logic of this research, and a qualitative analysis. Research is related to fraud cases labor done Icha to Prihandoko where Icha claimed to have acquaintance in disnaker solo named Mrs. Diah and could he is sending prihandoko as migrant workers abroad. Icha asking for money Prihandoko IDR.6.730.000,- ( six million seven hundred thirty thousand rupiah) to the cost of a and management of the cost of migrant workers , but after waited a long time, Prihandoko not to be going abroad. When clarified to disnaker solo , it turns out that Mrs. Diah not at the sending migrant workers but administrative officer and recognize Icha. Because they felt deceived, then prihandoko reported Icha to the related authorities to go to court. Results of research show that the use of evidence in a charge witness description in criminal fraud towards manpower has fulfilled the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, hereinafter conformity of the judge's consideration of a charge witness description in criminal fraud investigation towards manpower that a charge witness description which submitted public prosecutor to reinforce its arguments highly considered by the judge and also affecting conviction the judge in drop down the verdict. Keywords: A Charge Witness Description, Evidence and Criminal Fraud.]]>
<![CDATA[Kekuatan Pembuktian Keterangan Terdakwa Dalam Tindak Pidana Perdagangan Anak ]]>
<![CDATA[Ariska Widya Sari]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (160.49 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33522
<![CDATA[ This research aims to determine the strength of evidence of the defendants statements of who committed the child trafficking crime. The three defendants testified in the same trial. 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 legal secondary material in the form of all the publication about the law which is not an official document. The results of the discussion describes efforts to prove that uses information from the defendant in the trial of the same in accordance with the provisions of the Indonesia Criminal Procedural code because out of information the defendant not found stuff to waive accountability criminal code of conduct well as a reason and the fact the judge thought that the defendant must be convicted and dropped criminal. Keywords: Description defendant, Judge considerations, the Crime of Trafficking in Persons ]]>
<![CDATA[Argumentasi Pengajuan Kasasi Oleh Penuntut Umum Terhadap Putusan Judex Factie Dalam Perkara Penggelapan Dalam Jabatan ]]>
<![CDATA[Zulmi Tafrichan]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 5, No 3 (2017) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (283.192 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v5i3.33554
<![CDATA[ The purpose of this research are about compatibility of prosecutor’s argumentation who submit the cassation with article 253 on Criminal Code Procedures about judex factie verdict which is release the defendant from every lawsuits and a question abaut did the judex juris argumentation is compatible with Article 256 jo. Article 193 act (1) on Criminal Code Procedure. This normative law researchis aprescriptive research with using case approach method. This research is relative to one of cassation submission on in Pematangsiantar which is conducted by Nicko Fernando Simanjuntak. In 14th August 2014 Pematangsiantar District Court imposed verdict number:74/ Pid.B/2014/PN.PMS which is said that Nicko Fernando Simanjuntak is prooved doing an action which is verdicted by Prosecutor, but that action is not a crime then he Judge verdictedto release the defendant from every demand. From Pematangsiantar District Court’s verdict number:74/ Pid.B/2014/PN.PMS Prosecutor is applying a cassation request with a reason that the verdict is not applied as it should be. The results of this research show that the Prosecutor’s cassation request is fulfill the formal terms according article 244 until article 248 on Criminal Code Procedure which basically set to the decision of the criminal case on the last level, Prosecutor may submit to the Supreme Court of Cassation examination unless to the free verdict so acceptable to be examined and decided upon the Supreme Court, beside that it also qualify the material term in accordance with Article 253 paragraph (1) letter a Criminal Code which is basically to determine whether a rule of law is not applied or applied is not as it should be, then about the argument of Judex Juris in granting cassation Attorney / General Prosecutor in a on fraud of occupation case of the Supreme Court's decision No. 99 K / PID / 2015 had been is compatible with Article 255 paragraph (1) jo. with Article 256 on Criminal Code Procedure in addition to the arguments Judex Juris in granting cassation in the State Prosecutor of Pematangsiantar also compatible with the provisions of Article 256 jo. with Article 193 paragraph (1) Criminal Procedure CodeKeywords: Cassation, Prosecutor And Fraud of Occupation Case]]>
