cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Rustamaji
Contact Email
verstek@mail.uns.ac.id
Phone
+6285865999842
Journal Mail Official
verstek@mail.uns.ac.id
Editorial Address
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sebelas Maret Gedung 3, Departemen Hukum Acara Alamat: Ir. Sutami No. 36A,Kentingan, Surakarta
Location
Kota surakarta,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Verstek
Published by Universitas Sebelas Maret
ISSN : -     EISSN : 23550406     DOI : https://doi.org/10.20961/jv.v9i3.55027
Core Subject : Humanities, Social,
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
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.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 25 Documents
 1   2   3 
Search results for , issue "Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL" : 25 Documents clear
Pengabaian Alat Bukti Petunjuk Oleh Hakim Sebagai Alasan Kasasi Penuntut Umum dan Pertimbangan Mahkamah Agung Memutus Perkara Penggelapan dalam Jabatan Ganang Widyo Nindito
Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL
Publisher : Sebelas Maret University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (1123.182 KB) | DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30052

Abstract

     This research aims are to fnd out the evidence tool guidance abandonment by the judge as a Cassation Prosecutor’s reason and Supreme Court’s consideration in deciding an embezzlement case in offce. This research is classifed in normative law research. Cases that examined in Supreme Court Ruling Number 1243K/Pid/2015 is an embezzlement case in offce done by Defendant Desi Nanda Sari. This case began when the defendant who worked as a cashier at ‘Gudang Timbangan Mandiri Boluk’ who owned by Ny. Normah Sembiring given the investment by Ny. Normah Sembiring amount to Rp. 155.000.000,00 (one hundred and ffty fve million rupiah) as an investment in paying for the palm fruit purchased from the society. Several months passing by, Defendant Desi Nanda Sari didn’t pay the investment and proft amount to Rp 52.000.000,00 (ffty two million rupiah) so that the victim feels aggrieved and reported the Defendant’s act on indictment Article 374 Criminal Code because of the defendant’s action who have committed embezzlement in offce and resulted in a loss. Based on research result and discussion resulting conclusion that The Defendants volunteered cassation with reason put forward is that the judge not carefully in adjudicate an evidence tool in the form of instructions as appropriate. The cassation of public prosecutor’s submission reason have been in accordance with Article 253 section (1) Criminal Procedural Code, with consideration that The Judge didn’t properly and correctly consider all the facts of the trials. This matter has been accordance with the provisions on Article 256 Jo Article 193 section (1) Criminal Procedural Code with the consideration that The Judge of The Simalungun Court has applied the law incorrectly by not paying attention to the evidence tool in the form of instructions in the trials, Supreme Court granted The Supplication of Cassation by The Public Prosecutor and created a new law.Keywords: Evidence Tool, Cassation, Embezzlement in Offce.
Tinjauan Pengajuan Kasasi Penuntut Umum Terhadap Pembebasan Terdakwa dari Dakwaan Primair dalam Perkara Korupsi Dedhy Prabowo
Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL
Publisher : Sebelas Maret University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30044

Abstract

       This study aims to reviewing the suitability of the Cassation Appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the acquittal of the Defendant from the Primair indictment by the High Court Judges of Central Sulawesi Province in Palu in the Corruption Case as contained in the Supreme Court Decision of the Republic of Indonesia No. 134 K/PID.SUS/2014 with the fulfllment of The provisions of article 253 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This research is Normative Law Research with case approach, that is to Case of Corruption of Banggai Regency Budget Fund that is General Allocation Fund (DAU) for Development of SDN. Trijadi in Luwuk with the defendant Beby Kobstan. Based on the results of the research and discussion that has been the author of the analysis, the Prosecutor was able to prove that the Cassation Appeal and the reasons for his Cassation have been in accordance with the provisions contained in Article 253 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, especially as clearly stated in letter a which determines whether A rule of law is not applied or implemented is not as it should be. The Cassation Reason that has been submitted by the Public Prosecutor in the Case of Corruption can be seen that Judex Factie does not apply or improperly implements a rule of law, namely in the case of a criminal imposition against Beby Kobstan which corroborates the decision of the District Court of Luwuk namely imprisonment for 1 (One) year is not or less fulflls the sense of justice in the community, since the Judge of the District Court Luwuk and the Court of Corruption at the Central Sulawesi High Court in Palu has taken over the whole prosecution of the Public Prosecutor Luwuk and stated that the Defendant Beby Kobstan has been proven Legitimate and convincing guilty of committing a criminal act of corruption.Keywords: Appeal, Indictment, Criminal Act of Corruption, Corruption.
Aspek Hukum Pertimbangan Mahkamah Agung Mengabulkan Permohonan Kasasi Penuntut Umum dalam Perkara Narkotika Jati Panuntun
Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL
Publisher : Sebelas Maret University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30076

Abstract

     This study aims to determine the legal aspects of the Supreme Court’s consideration to grant the request of the Public Prosecutor in the narcotics case. The research method used is normative legal research. The approach used is the approach of law and case approach. Sources of legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials. It is known that the Supreme Court’s consideration to grant the request of the Cassation of the Public Prosecutor stated that the Defendant commits a narcotic crime in accordance with the provisions of Article 256 jo of Article 193 paragraph (1) of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code where the Supreme Court declares that Judex Factie of the High Court of Surabaya has been wrong Applying the law therefore the Supreme Court adjudicates the case and declares that the Defendants are legally and convincingly proven guilty of committing a narcotic crime and sentence of imprisonment to Defendant I and Defendant II with imprisonment respectively for 4 (four) years And a fne of Rp.800.000.000,00 (eight hundred million rupiahs), respectively, provided that such fne is not paid, it shall be replaced by imprisonment for 1 (one) month.Keywords: Cassation, Legal Considerations, Narcotics Crime
Penggunaan Alat Bukti Surat Sebagai Upaya Penuntut Umum dalam Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Membujuk Anak Untuk Melakukan Perbuatan Cabul Ignatius Ninorey
Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL
Publisher : Sebelas Maret University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30054

Abstract

     The purpose of this study is to discuss about, frstly whether the submission of proof of letter or Visum Et Repertum in a criminal act to persuade the child to commit lewd acts are in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, secondly whether the evidence proof of letter or Visum Et Repertum in the criminal investigation to persuade the child to Performing lewd acts considered by a judge.      The results of this study indicate that the use of letter proof or Visum Et Repertum in a criminal act to persuade a child to commit obscene acts have complied with the provisions of Article 187 letter c of the Criminal Procedure Code, So that the explanation about the evidence of expert information must be based on the expertise and also there is an offcial statement in which in this case the expert information is completed and based on the Visum et Repertum considered by the judge as the basis for the cut off plus the testimony of the witness, the statement of the defendant and the evidence.Keywords: Letter or Visum Et Repertum, Evidence and Criminal pervert.
Konstruksi Hukum Hakim Mengabulkan Gugatan Penggugat atas Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara Studi Putusan Pengadilan TUN Banjarmasin No.04/G/2011/PTUN.BJM Yuka Destralanda; Dr. Soehartono, S.H., M.Hum -
Verstek Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL
Publisher : Sebelas Maret University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jv.v7i1.30086

Abstract

      State administrative courts is a judicial committee having authority to give justice to people who have problem in state administration. The dispute on state administration is dispute in state administration between two person or civil law legal entity and the offcial. One of the most interesting dispute to be discussed is a dispute about Prof. Dr. Ir. H. Udiansyah MS who has been stopped for his position in University of Lambung Mangkurat which is stated in Rector letter no.052/H8/KP/2011 and no.058/H8/KP/2011.      This research approach was casuistic to analyze the conception of the judge verdict for this dispute. Beside that, this research used normative approach to saw the construction of the law on the verdict. The result of this research is used in law explanation as an input for judgement system in the future. The data which is used was the verdicts from the dispute and the expert statement to explain the construction of the verdict with its rationalization.      The judge has granted the suit for Unlam Rector No.052/H8/KP/2011 and No.058/H8/KP/2011 based on the rationalization the defendants as the offcial never give the legal certainty and had violate the right administration system which causing irregularity, imbalance, and problem in state administration and injustice for the plaintiff.Keywords: state administrative courts, Verdict Conception, Verdict on stopping as offcial.

Page 3 of 3 | Total Record : 25

 1   2   3 

Filter by Year

2019 2019


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 12, No 4: OKTOBER - DESEMBER 2024 Vol 12, No 3: JULI - SEPTEMBER 2024 Vol 11, No 4 (2023) Vol 11, No 3: 2023 Vol 11, No 2: 2023 Vol 11, No 1: 2023 Vol 11, No 1: JANUARI - APRIL 2023 Vol 10, No 4: 2022 Vol 10, No 3: 2022 Vol 10, No 2: 2022 Vol 10, No 1 (2022): JANUARI - APRIL Vol 10, No 1: 2022 Vol 9, No 4: 2021 Vol 9, No 3 (2021) Vol 9, No 3: 2021 Vol 9, No 2: 2021 Vol 9, No 2 (2021) Vol 9, No 1: 2021 Vol 9, No 2: MEI - AGUTUS Vol 8, No 3 (2020): DESEMBER JURNAL VERSTEK VOL. 8 NO. 3 ( SEPTEMBER - DESEMBER 2020 ) Vol 8, No 2 (2020): AGUSTUS Vol 8, No 1 (2020): APRIL Vol 8, No 3: SEPTEMBER - DESEMBER Vol 8, No 2: MEI - AGUSTUS Vol 8, No 1: JANUARI-APRIL Vol 7, No 3 (2019): DESEMBER Vol 7, No 2 (2019): AGUSTUS Vol 7, No 2 (2019) Vol 7, No 1 (2019): Foreword Vol 7, No 1 (2019): APRIL Vol 7, No 3: SEPTEMBER - DESEMBER Vol 7, No 2: MEI - AGUSTUS Vol 7, No 1: JANUARI-APRIL Vol 6, No 3 (2018) Vol 6, No 3 (2018): DESEMBER Vol 6, No 2 (2018): AGUSTUS Vol 6, No 2 (2018) Vol 6, No 1 (2018) Vol 5, No 3 (2017) Vol 5, No 2 (2017) Vol 5, No 1 (2017) Vol 4, No 3 (2016) Vol 4, No 2 (2016) Vol 4, No 1 (2016) Vol 3, No 2 (2015) Vol 3, No 1 (2015) Vol 2, No 3 (2014) Vol 2, No 2 (2014) Vol 2, No 1 (2014) Vol 1, No 3 (2013) Vol 1, No 2 (2013) Vol 1, No 1 (2013) More Issue