cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Agus Budianto
Contact Email
agus.budianto@uph.edu
Phone
+622125535168
Journal Mail Official
lexprospiciteditor@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Kampus Pascasarjana Universitas Pelita Harapan Plaza Semanggi lt. 16, Jl. Jend. Sudirman No. 50, RT.1/RW.4, Karet Semanggi, Kecamatan Setiabudi, Kota Jakarta Selatan, Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta 12930
Location
Kota tangerang,
Banten
INDONESIA
Lex Prospicit
Published by Universitas Pelita Harapan
ISSN : 29881781     EISSN : 29881773     DOI : -
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Lex Prospicit is a scientific journal published by the Master of Law Study Program, Faculty of Law, Universitas Pelita Harapan in collaboration with Asosiasi Advokat Indonesia (AAI) and serves as a venue for scientific information in the field of law resulting from scientific research or research-based scientific law writing. The articles published in this journal cover a broad range of topics, including Business Law, Antitrust and Competition Law, Intellectual Property Rights Law, Criminal Law, International Law, Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, Agrarian Law, Health Law, Adat Law, Environmental Law, Banking Law, Cyber Law, Bankruptcy Law, WTO Law, Investment Law, Tax Law, Human Rights Law, ADR and Arbitration Law, and Labor Law.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol 1, No 2: July 2023" : 5 Documents clear
Optimalization of the Application of Act Number 22 of 2022 Concerning Companies in Overcoming Problems of Management of Corporate Institutions (Lapas) in Indonesia Tasya Einakrisda Sheiba
Lex Prospicit Vol 1, No 2: July 2023
Publisher : Universitas Pelita Harapan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19166/lp.v1i2.6672

Abstract

The purpose of correctional systems is to improve the quality of personality and independence of inmates so that they are aware of their mistakes, improve themselves, and not repeat criminal acts, so that they can be accepted again by the community, can live normally as good citizens, obey the law, be responsible, and can play an active role in development. However, this correctional goal cannot be realized properly and optimally if the problems that exist in prisons are still not resolved properly. The type of research used in this paper is a type of empirical normative research. Collecting data using literature study methods and also interviews through the Forum Group Discussion (FGD), with the type of approach to legal systematics and Non-Judicial Case Study as well as data analysis in the form of qualitative research. Based on the research that the author did, can conclude that problems related to overcapacity, prison facilities and infrastructure, and human resources (prison officers) can be overcome by the establishment of Law Number 22 of 2022, but problems related to halinar cannot yet be resolved by Law No. 22 of 2022. The form of optimization strategy that can be done to overcome problems in prisons is to optimize the coaching activities provided to inmates, where prisoners become more active, not just as observers, apply restorative justice in prisons and one example is by providing a special room for mothers and children, as well as forming the National Correctional Agency (BAPASNAS).
Obstruction of Justice by Lawyer Fredrich Yunadi in the Corruption Case of the E-KTP (Electronic Identity Card) Procurement Project Involving Former People's Representative Council Chairman Setya Novanto Daniel Halomoan; Figo Edsel Hidayat; Jaya Pahlevi; Rezki Tama A.P; Rofik Cahya Arta; William Rando Bayakta
Lex Prospicit Vol 1, No 2: July 2023
Publisher : Universitas Pelita Harapan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19166/lp.v1i2.6947

Abstract

Many lawyers have encountered cases of legal obstruction, which raises concerns since advocates are a respected profession within law enforcement. This paper aims to: (1) provide examples of cases and explain the modus operandi and working system in the case of Fredrich Yunadi's legal obstruction; (2) examine how legal obstacles have become phenomena within the legal profession; (3) offer sociological and psychological perspectives from criminologists; and (4) investigate the implementation and process of punishment for the perpetrators. This research falls under the category of normative research, as the author examines library and secondary materials. The study reviews positive law and legal principles. Primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials serve as the data sources. The data collection method employed is library research or documentary studies. Based on the research findings, two main conclusions can be drawn. First, law enforcement actions in Indonesia have not effectively prevented advocates from being prosecuted for corruption, as not all legal subjects comply with relevant legal norms. This is influenced by three components of law enforcement: legal substance, law enforcement, and legal culture. Second, the connection between law enforcement and lawyers accused of obstructing justice with advocates' right to immunity is related to the fact that the position of advocates is vulnerable to intersect with obstruction of justice when advocates define their right to immunity without considering the limitations stipulated in laws and regulations. This highlights the importance of advocating a code of ethics for advocates.
Criminological Examination of The Premeditated Murder Perpetrated by Richard Eliezer in Case Law Number 798/Pid.B/2022/PN JKT.SEL Adzholla Hadzna Sungkar; Amanda Regina Pallas Heriman; Caroline Caroline; Muhammad Afif Efendi
Lex Prospicit Vol 1, No 2: July 2023
Publisher : Universitas Pelita Harapan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19166/lp.v1i2.6941

Abstract

Murder cases in Indonesia often occur but there is one murder case committed by law enforcers. This harms the public view of law enforcement officials. On the other hand, we must be able to see this murder case from the perspective of the murderer, one of whom is Richard Eliezer in the murder case of Brigadier Joshua Hutabarat. Richard Eliezer was a policeman who killed another policeman, Joshua. In this murder we must be able to see from different perspectives such as the perspective of psychology, sociology and society so that everyone can judge whether the penalty that Richard Eliezer recevied was proper or not. The purpose of this research is to examine from the criminological perspective the premeditated murder perpetrated by law enforcement officers against their aides who should be under their guidance. The methodology used is normative, reinforced by primary data, especially in the material of Court Decision no. 798/Pid.B/2022, statements from witnesses in this premeditated murder case. Then, analyze with secondary data and the law system in the police. It is found that psychology of abuse of power often involves analyzing the motivations and behaviors of individuals who abuse power, as well as the factors that influence and prevent such behavior related to the penalty imposed in the case law, seen from perspectives such as the psychology, sociology and society.
The Existence of Notary Cooperation with Online Service Bureaus in the Making of Deeds of Establishment of Limited Liability Companies Clarissa Chrysilla; Reinard Yudhaprawira
Lex Prospicit Vol 1, No 2: July 2023
Publisher : Universitas Pelita Harapan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19166/lp.v1i2.7597

Abstract

Notaries are authorized to mold all actions, agreements, and determinations desired by the parties who come to them to confirm them and pour into an authentic deed, aiming for the deed to have complete evidential power and validity. Therefore, notaries are obliged to fulfill all the provisions of their positions and other regulations and are responsible for the deeds they have prepared. In practice, especially since Covid-19 there are still notaries who cooperate with online service bureaus. The type of study is empirical juridical, which in other words is a type of sociological legal research, also known as field research, which examines the applicable legal provisions and what happens in reality in the community. From the research results obtained from decision No.36/PID.SUS/TPK/2014/PN.JKT.PST in conjunction with Cassation Court Decision No. 980 K/Pid.Sus/2015, that a notary does not check documents (the ID Card) in the creation of a company, and they aren’t to meet directly before the Notary, but with a service bureau. In this case, it is related to the validity of the company establishment deed that has been made by a notary in collaboration with an online service bureau, where the appearer does not appear before the notary because the one who appears before the notary is the service bureau. One of the main advantages of notary cooperation with online service bureaus is of course that it is not bound by working time. That the cooperation between the notaries does not have a written work bond but only in the form of verbal, however, such actions still violate the UUJN and the Notary Code of Ethics, and there have been lacunae in the law to regulate cooperation between notary and online service bureau. In the case that the author raises, notary cooperation with service bureaus is prone to criminal acts (corruption or fraud), therefore the company's deed of establishment becomes null and void. Second, the responsibility of the Notary Professional Organization, towards the Notary who cooperates with the online service bureau, which violates the provisions of the UUJN and the Code of Ethics, then based on Article 4 number 4 of the Notary Code of Ethics, it is said that the act of cooperating with an online service bureau is categorized as a violation of the notary code of ethics, which is accompanied by sanctions in the form of: Reprimand; Warning; Temporary dismissal from Association membership; Honorable dismissal from Association membership; and Dishonorable dismissal from Association membership. The INI's responsibility as a notary professional organization is as a form of providing duties and authority in providing guidance, supervision and protection to notaries.
Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Artificial Intellegence Dalam Aspek Penyalahgunaan Deepfake Technology Pada Perspektif UU PDP dan GDPR [Legal Protection of Artificial Intellegence in Misusage of Deepfake Technology in the Perspective of PDP Law and GDPR] Jeremiah Maximillian Laza; Rizky Karo Karo
Lex Prospicit Vol 1, No 2: July 2023
Publisher : Universitas Pelita Harapan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19166/lp.v1i2.7386

Abstract

Deepfake is a hyper-realistic video that applies AI to depict a person saying and doing things that never happened using face-swapping that leaves little trace of evidence that the video was manipulated. Deepfake is a product of AI that combines, stitches, replaces and superimposes images and video clips to make a fake video look like it's real, and the video is said by the person when in reality the person whose face is replaced in the video never said or acted that way. The legal issue that arises from Deepfake is misinformation, disinformation and fraud, so there needs to be a law governing Deepfake, where in the European Union, regulations related to Deepfake are indirectly contained in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and in Indonesia itself there is Law Number 27 of 2022 concerning Personal Data Protection (PDP Law). The formulation of the problem to be studied is how the legal protection of AI Deepfake in terms of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Law Number 27 of 2022 concerning Personal Data Protection. The research method used here is normative, where positive law in Indonesia and in the European Union will be used to analyze. In conclusion, Deepfake is not specifically regulated in either the PDP Law or GDPR, but because AI uses data to develop, the PDP Law and GDPR can still be relevant and can regulate to a certain degree regarding AI.Bahasa Indonesia Abstrak: Deepfake merupakan video hiper-realistis yang menerapkan AI untuk menggambarkan seseorang mengatakan dan melakukan hal-hal yang tidak pernah terjadi. Misalnya dengan membuat pertukaran wajah yang meninggalkan sedikit jejak bukti ada manipulasi terhadap video tersebut. Deepfake merupakan suatu produk AI yang menggabungkan, mempersatukan, mengganti dan menempatkan gambar maupun klip video palsu tampak seperti video itu asli, dan video tersebut seolah-olah beisi perkataan atau berbuatan orang yang wajahnya muncul dalam video. Namun, kenyataan yang berbicara adalah orang pengganti yang wajahnya tidak muncul dalam video tersebut. Isu hukum yang muncul dari deepfake adalah tidak ada pengaturan hukum yang berisi rumusan kaidah yang mengatur larangan melakukan deepfake sebagai misinformasi, disinformasi serta penipuan. Oleh sebab itu penulis melakukan penelitian untuk menemukan peraturan dalam undang-undang yang ada rumusan yang dapat dipergunakan untuk meminta pertanggungjawaban hukum dari pelaku deepfake. Penulis berpendapat bahwa pengaturan deepfake secara tidak langsung tertuang pada General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), dan di Indonesia sendiri ada Undang-Undang Nomor 27 Tahun 2022 tentang Perlindungan Data Pribadi (UU PDP). Oleh karenanya, masalah yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana penggunaan pengaturan deepfake dalam General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) dan bagaimana UU PDP Indonesia meminta pertanggungjawaban hukum dari pelaku deepfake sebagai tindak pidana penipuan atau membuat berita bohong. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif. Dikumpulkan dan dibahas aturan hukum positif di Indonesia dan Uni Eropa sebagai sumber bahan hukum primer, serta kepustakaan yang terkait sebagai sumber bahan hukum sekunder. Ditemukan bahwa karena deepfake itu adalah AI yang menggunakan data atau informasi elektronik, maka UU PDP dan GDPR relevan digunakan untuk dipelajari pengaturan tentang larangan manipulasi AI untuk misinformasi, disinformasi atau penipuan serta pembuatan berita bohong di cyberworld.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2023 2023


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 3 No. 2: July 2025 Vol. 3 No. 1: February 2025 Vol. 2 No. 2: July 2024 Vol 2, No 1: February 2024 Vol. 2 No. 1: February 2024 Vol. 1 No. 2: July 2023 Vol 1, No 2: July 2023 Vol 1, No 1: February 2023 Vol. 1 No. 1: February 2023