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
25 Documents
Search results for
, issue
"Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL"
:
25 Documents
clear
<![CDATA[Pertimbangan Hakim Dalam Menjatuhkan Sanksi Pidana Penjara Tanpa Rehabilitasi Medis Terhadap Terdakwa Penyalah Guna Narkotika Bagi Diri Sendiri ]]>
<![CDATA[Adi Bambang Waseso]]>;
<![CDATA[Edy Herdyanto., S.H., M.H]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1097.209 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.28966
<![CDATA[This research examine issues concerning reason District Court of Kota Agung in deciding verdict against the Defendant of narcotics class one abuser for himself. This research include normative law researchNarcotics is a substance or a drug derived from a plant or not plant, either synthetic or semisynthetic, which can cause a decrease or alteration of consciousness, and can lead to dependence. Actually drug is a substance or drug that can be useful and necessary for the treatment of certain diseases. However, the use of which is not in accordance with the standards for treatment, would cause harm to themselves and society at large the younger generation. Thus the drug abusers should be rehabilitated. In the Narcotics Act has regulated how the arrangements for the rehabilitation of drug abusers. Abusers can we distinguish again become addicts and victims of drug abusers. Because they both use narcotics without rights and against the law. However, the setting for the abusers impressed overlap. There are criminal sanctions and penalties related actions in a single article abusers. The regulation stipulated in Article 127, where paragraph (1) of the criminal sanctions, while paragraph (2) and (3) of the sanctions measures (rehabilitation).It happened at the District Court Kota Agung No:32/Pid.Sus/2015/PN.Kot, the judge consideration do not consider correctly whole of indictment, evidence and witness statements in article 127 where paragraphThe defendant according to the statements of witnesses, experts, up to more documentary evidence leads to a drug addict, but the panel of Judges prefer imprisonment verdict without rehabilitation. Whereas in the article 127, where paragraph (3) someone who is proven to be a drug abuser must undergo a rehabilitation process.]]>
<![CDATA[Argumentasi Kasasi Penuntut Umum Berdasarkan Kesalahan Judex Factie Memutus Perkara Penganiayaan ]]>
<![CDATA[Dimas Yoga Budi Purnomo]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1099.061 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30046
<![CDATA[ The aims of this research are the arguments of the Prosecutor proposed the Cassation against judex factie erred in applying the law things of persecution for not considering the presence of witnesses and evidence of the existence of the letter in a Supreme Court verdict Number 244 K/PID/2015 has been in accordance with article 253 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Find out what being a consideration in granting the Supreme Court judge of Cassation Prosecutor has in accordance with article 256 jo article 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The research method used was the normative legal research. Legal materials in the form of source material primary law and secondary law materials. Engineering analysis method using a deductive syllogism patterned thought. Reason of appeal by the public prosecutor is because the law does not apply judex factie properly. Based on the facts in the trial that the defendant was clearly doing the crime of persecution, but the judge cut off the defendant not proven conclusively do the criminal act of persecution and to relieve the defendant of all charges of the public prosecutor. A matter before the judge should consider carefully in advance any facts in the trial included evidence, but in this case the judge does not consider the existence of witnesses and evidence in the form of a letter of visum et repertum. Erred in applying the law by judex factie resulted in the defendant’s assertion of the public prosecutor so obviously the Supreme Court in cassation has been granted in accordance with article 256 jo article 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code.Keywords: Argumentation Of Cassation Submissions, Judex Factie, Assault, Evidence.]]>
<![CDATA[Upaya Pembuktian Dakwaan Penuntut Umum Berbentuk Kombinasi Dan Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Memutus Perkara Tindak Pidana Perdagangan Orang ]]>
<![CDATA[Rezha Nugroho]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1166.069 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30078
<![CDATA[ This law research aimed to answer the following problems. Firstly, whether the attempt of authentication the Public Prosecutor’s indictment in the form of crime in human traffcking and worker recruitment combination has used legal evidence according to Article 184 of Criminal Procedural Law (KUHAP). Secondly, whether the judge’s rationale in deciding the Defendant guilty has been consistent with primary indictment and in sentencing cumulative punishment in human traffcking crime has been consistent with Article 183 jo Article 193 of Criminal Procedural Law (KUHAP). The result of the research showed that frstly, the Public Prosecutor’s indictment use combined indictment by combining alternative and subsidiary indictments. Public prosecutor, based on the indictment document, had fled evidence including Witness statement, and Defendant’s statement and information, before the court. It has fulflled the provision of Article 184 clause (1) a, c, and e of Criminal Procedural Law (KUHAP). Secondly, the consideration of punishment severity sentenced by the Judge has been equivalent to the Defendant’s guilt and has fulflled the provision of Article 2 clause of Law Number 21 of 2007. In relation to Article 183 jo Article 193 clause (1) of Criminal Procedural Law (KUHAP), this Judge’s decision has been appropriate. Recalling that in sentencing the Defendant, the judge has considered at least two legal evidence and has obtain conviction that the defendant is evidently guilty legally for committing human traffcking crime and has been consistent with Article 193 clause (1) of Criminal Procedural Law (KUHAP).Keywords: Public Prosecutor’s authentication attempt, Judge’s rationale, human traffcking]]>
<![CDATA[Pembuktian Dakwaan Oleh Penuntut Umum dan Pertimbangan Hakim Menjatuhkan Pidana Kumulatif ]]>
<![CDATA[Annisa Nilasari]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1131.073 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30036
<![CDATA[ This research examines the issues of whether the indictment by the Public Prosecution Against Defendant the perpetrator of the criminal act of child abduction has used legal evidences according to Article 184 Code of Criminal Procedure and whether the judge’s consideration of imposing the imprisonment and the fne against the Defendant the perpetrator of the kidnapping of the child has been in accordance with Article 183 jo 193 paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This research is normative legal research that is both prescriptive and applied. Proving the indictment by the Public Prosecutor against the Defendant the perpetrator of the criminal act of child abduction has used the legal evidence accordance to Article 184 Code of Criminal Procedure that is witness testimony, letter, and description of defendant. The judge’s consideration of imprisonment and fnes against the Accused child abuser in accordance with Article 183 jo of Article 193 paragraph (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure that The judge should not drop criminal to someone unless with at least two legitimate evidence he gained confdence that a crime actually occurred and that the Defendant are guilty of doing it. The Judge has tried the Defendant to be proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing the crime of kidnapping the child and imprisonment for 4 years 8 months and a fne of Rp 60,000,000, - provided that the unpaid penalty is substituted with imprisonment for 1 month.Keywords: proof, the indictment, public prosecutor, judge Considerations, kidnapping the child]]>
<![CDATA[Pertimbangan Mahkamah Agung Memutus Perkara dibidang Perikanan Berupa Pengoperasionalan Kapal Tanpa Surat Ijin Penangkapan Ikan (SIPI) ]]>
<![CDATA[Lufti Abraham]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1124.666 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30068
<![CDATA[ This study aims to determine the consideration of the Supreme Court deciding on the feld of fshery in the form of the operation of the ship without the fshing license (SIPI). The research method used is normative legal research. The approach used is a case approach approach. Sources of legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials. It is known that the consideration of the Supreme Court granted the appeal of the Public Prosecutor in the case of the operational of a ship without a fshing license (SIPI) conducted by Defendant Syaifullah alias Ipul bin Abdullah on the basis that Judex Facti has misinterpreted the Letters of Ships, Certifcate of Eligibility Sailing or one of them interpreted as Fishing Permit Permit (SIPI). The Supreme Court then annulled the Tarakan District Court Decision Number 91/Pid.Sus/2015/PN.Tra dated July 9, 2015 and adjudicated itself saying the Defendant has been proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal offense in the feld of fsheries and imposing a criminal offense against the Accused therefore with imprisonment for 6 (six) months and a fne of Rp.1.000.000.000,00 (one billion) rupiah for 3 (three) months subsidair for imprisonment. Under the aforementioned provision, the Supreme Court’s consideration is in accordance and in compliance with the provisions of Article 256 jo of Article 193 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.Keywords: Cassation, Judge Consideration, Crime in the Field of Fisheries]]>
<![CDATA[Tinjauan Pertimbangan Hakim Mahkamah Agung Atas Perkara Illegal Fishing ]]>
<![CDATA[Lastika Wahyu Andhini]]>;
<![CDATA[Kristiyadi, S,H., M.Hum -]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1141.449 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30058
<![CDATA[ Legal research aims to fnd out the reason of Cassation fling compliance by the public prosecutor in the case illegal fshing with the provision of article 253 KUHAP as well as fnd out the suitability of the consideration of the Supreme Court granted the petition for cassation and Decides the defendant is proven legally and convincingly guilty of fshing boats without operationalize offcial documents was in accordance with clause 256 jo 193 Article paragraph (1) of the KUHAP. This research included in this type of normative legal research that is both prescriptive and applied. Use primary and secondary legal materials. The research approach with case studies. Legal materials collection technique is done by collecting documents for the study of law. Legal materials analysis techniques of deductive syllogisms that are done in a stemmed from the fling of the major premise then fled a minor premise, from the second premise obtained then it can be drawn conclusions with regard to the matter. The results obtained from this research about the Supreme Court verdict Number 1727 K/Pid. Sus/2014 were in accordance with the provisions contained in Article 253 KUHAP especially clearly listed on the letter a that determines whether a true rule of law not applied or not applied as it should be. Article 256 jo 193 Article paragraph (1) of the KUHAP contains if the Court held that the defendant was guilty of a criminal offence who didakwakan him, then the Court dropped the criminal. Legal considerations the Tribunal Judges in examining the petition for Cassation Prosecutor granted; the High Court ruling cancelling the feld number: 129/PID/2013/PT. PDG 25 July 2013 has been improving and the verdict of the District Court the feld Number: 254/Pid. B/2013/PN. PDG on 30 may 2013.Keywords: Illegal Fishing, IUU Fishing, The Submission, Consideration Of Cassation Judge, Ship Catching Fish, Fishing]]>
<![CDATA[Argumentasi Kasasi Putusan Bebas Judex Facti Akibat Kesalahan Penerapan Hukum Perkara Memakai Surat Palsu Atau yang Dipalsukan ]]>
<![CDATA[Adzamayah Satmuharrulys Baktiakbar]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1106.862 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.29214
<![CDATA[This research aims to fnd out the conformity argumentation cassation from Public Prosecutor against the acquittal due to misapplied the law in cases of use false document or falsifed document have been in accordance with Article 253 Criminal Procedure Code. This writing is a normative law research orcommonly called the doctrinal legal research. The results of the discussion to explain that the reasons for the appeal fled Public Prosecutor against the decision of Judex Facti Cirebon District Court has been in accordance with the provisions of Article 253 Criminal Procedure Code about the reason for the cassation request. The reasons for the appeal fled Public Prosecutor has been in accordance with the provisions of Article 253 paragraph (1) letter a and Article 253 paragraph (1) letter b Criminal Procedure Code. The Cirebon District Court that has investigated and adjudicated the case on behalf of the defendant R. HARDADI has made a mistake by not applying the rule of law namely misinterpreted the meaning of falsedocument or falsifed document in the primary charge, not applied the law of evidence, and misinterpreted the meaning of “Deliberately use false document or falsifed document as if it were true” in the subsidiary charge, and the method of adjudicated were not implemented the provisions of Article 197 paragraph (1) letter d namely the Cirebon District Court was ignore witnesses testimony, Article 185 paragraph (6) letter a namely the Cirebon District Court was not paying attention to the suitability of witnesses testimony andevidence, and Article 187 letter c of the Criminal Procedure Code namely the Cirebon District Court was neglect to assess evidence . The reason cassation Public Prosecutor has met the provisions of Article 253 paragraph (1) letter a and Article 253 paragraph (1) letter b Criminal Procedure Code namely the rule of law is not applied or not applied as it should be and the method of adjudicated were not implemented under the provisions of the law]]>
<![CDATA[Kajian Yuridis Pembuktian Berdasarkan Alat Bukti Petunjuk dalam Perkara Penipuan ]]>
<![CDATA[Fajar Nugrahadi]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1123.831 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30048
<![CDATA[ This research aimed to investigate the suitability of cassation petition proposed by the Prosecutors based on Judex Facti ignoring the proofng tools towards the enforcement that was detached from any prosecutions in law of fraud with the Article 253 of KUHAP. This research used the normative law research method. The material sources used the primary legal material and secondary legal material. The analyzing law sources used the syllogism method and used the deductive interpretation. The cassation petition proposed by the Prosecutors towards the enforcement that was detached from any prosecutions based on Judex Facti misapplied the law in fraud cases with the provisions contained in Article 253 verse (1) of KUHAP. Judex Facti in this case was the Airmadidi District Court in making enforcement did not apply the proper law and they not judging in accordance with the provisions of the law because they ignored the judicial evidence that was in accordance with the Article 184 of KUHAP (witness testimony, experts testimony, defendant testimony, document evidence and judicial evidence).Keywords: Cassation, Prosecutors, The Court Enforcement, Fraud]]>
<![CDATA[Tinjauan Penggunaan Berita Acara Laboratories Kriminal Sebagai Bukti Surat Dalam Perkara Narkotika ]]>
<![CDATA[Satya Dipa Asriga]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1122.385 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30080
<![CDATA[ This research has something as a purpose to show how deep the using of instrument of evident is. It is works properly as Criminal Procedural Law or not. Not only for the based of judgement but also for the based of defnite the matter of narcotics criminalism. The research is one of normative law research which has two kind of side view, applied knowledge and a perspective with case approach. Primary law material and secondary law material are used for reach this research and collected by literature study. The conclusion based on the result of study and research is: offcial report of criminal laboratories is appropriate with stipulation of article 187 letter C Criminal Procedural Law, because it has just fullfl the qualifcation as legal evident letter.The matter about dualism of criminal laboratories, it has been described by named this instrument of evident are free and not arouse effect on the power of authentication appraisal. The second matter, letter evident as the research of criminal laboratories offcial report in the decision of narcotics case was not the only point on decision judgement, but judges who look out this case has to be flled by minimum autenthication azaz. It’s showed by at least two things of legal evidents instrument, and the law is appropriate with negative authentication system which is not has the same meaning as a perfect instrument of evident. The underlined words here, the judges is free to make a point about the power and the rightness of evident’s instrument.Keyword : criminal laboratories offcial report, letter evidence, narcotics]]>
<![CDATA[Pertimbangan Hakim Memutus Perkara Dengan Dissenting Opinion dalam Tindak Pidana Menelantarkan Isteri dan Anak ]]>
<![CDATA[Wigit Mayang Panuluh]]>
<![CDATA[ Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Sebelas Maret University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (1090.302 KB)
|
DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30084
<![CDATA[ This writing aims to determine the consideration of the Supreme Court Justices impose the criminal punishment of the perpetrators of the crime of neglect of others in the household sphere. The research method used is normative legal research. The approach used is the approach of the Act and the case approach. Sources of legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials. Based on the result of the research, it is known that the consideration of the Supreme Court Justices imposed the prison sentence in the criminal act of abandoning the wife and the child by dissenting opinion dissenting opinion (in this case one of the judges believes that the deed has not suffciently fulflled the criterion of a crime) in accordance with the provisions of Article 188 paragraph (4) jo of Article 243 of Law Number 31 of 1997 concerning Military Courts, which states that the decision in a deliberation is the result of a unanimous conspiracy, unless it has been sought after earnestly unreachable, the Decision shall be made by majority vote and if The Supreme Court granted the Supreme Court’s appeal, then the Supreme Court will revoke the Cassation’s decision. This is evidenced by the implementation of consensus deliberations in making decisions but not reached an agreement then the Panel of Judges make decisions based on the majority vote. The different opinions of the Judges are contained in the Supreme Court ruling. The Supreme Court granted the request of the High Military Oditur Case I Medan by canceling the High Court Military Court’s Decision of Medan. Declare the defendant guilty of committing a criminal act of abandoning another person in the household sphere and the Panel of Judges imposing a prison sentence on behalf of Defendant Riwanto for 4 (four) months.Keywords : neglect of people, judge’s consideration, dissenting opin]]>
