cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Rengga Kusuma Putra
Contact Email
garuda@apji.org
Phone
+6289682151476
Journal Mail Official
febri@apji.org
Editorial Address
Perum Cluster G11 Nomor 17 Jl. Plamongan Indah, Pedurungan, Kota Semarang 50195, Semarang, Provinsi Jawa Tengah, 50195
Location
Kota semarang,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Konstitusi: Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Published by Asosiasi Peneliti Dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia
ISSN : 30633877     EISSN : 30634040     DOI : 10.62383
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
bidang hukum, administrasi publik, dan ilmu komunikasi. Jurnal ini menyajikan artikel-artikel yang menyoroti berbagai aspek hukum, termasuk tetapi tidak terbatas pada isu-isu konstitusi, perundang-undangan, yudisial, administrasi publik, serta teori-teori komunikasi yang terkait dengan sistem hukum dan administrasi publik.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 159 Documents
 12   13   14   15   16 
Analisis Yuridis Pemberian Abolisi terhadap Pidana Korupsi dalam Studi Kasus Tom Lembong Muzakki Muzakki; Fina Rosalina
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1864

Abstract

This study is motivated by the granting of abolition to Tom Lembong in a corruption case, which has raised debate regarding its compatibility with the principle of legal certainty, considering that corruption is categorized as an extraordinary crime requiring consistent law enforcement. The objective of this study is to analyze the legal framework governing abolition as a presidential prerogative and to examine its implications for the principle of legal certainty within Indonesia's criminal justice system. This research employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Legal materials were collected through library research consisting of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal sources and were analyzed qualitatively using a descriptive-analytical method. The findings indicate that the President's authority to grant abolition is constitutionally regulated under the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia with due consideration from the House of Representatives. Nevertheless, granting abolition in corruption cases that have undergone judicial proceedings may create legal uncertainty by affecting the finality of court decisions, the principle of equality before the law, and the effectiveness of anti-corruption enforcement. Therefore, clearer regulations concerning the requirements, limitations, and procedures for granting abolition are necessary to ensure that the exercise of presidential prerogative remains consistent with the principles of the rule of law, legal certainty, and justice for society.
Tinjauan Yuridis Keadilan Restoratif dalam KUHP Baru sebagai Instrumen Dekongesti terhadap Overcrowding Lembaga Pemasyarakatan di Indonesia Nazwa Queena Amelia Fanany
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1865

Abstract

This study aims to determine the regulation of restorative justice in Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code, as well as the role of restorative justice in Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code as an instrument of decongestion (reducing overcrowding) in Correctional Institutions. The type of research used is normative juridical with a statutory and conceptual approach. The results of the study indicate that Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code does not explicitly regulate restorative justice as a mechanism for resolving criminal cases, but its values ​​have been internalized through the objectives of punishment, sentencing guidelines, judicial pardon, and alternative punishment regulations, such as supervision and community service. These regulations reflect a shift in the paradigm of punishment from a retribution-oriented approach to recovery and social reintegration. Furthermore, the restorative justice values ​​in the New Criminal Code serve as an instrument for decongestion in correctional institutions by strengthening alternative punishments, potentially reducing the use of imprisonment and curbing overcrowding. Although their effectiveness depends on implementation by law enforcement officials.
Diskresi Penyidik dan Batas Normatif Rehabilitasi Penyalahguna Narkotika dalam Pasal 82 Huruf i Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2025 tentang KUHAP Aldri Christian; Agus Rasyid Chandra Wijaya
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1867

Abstract

The codification of Indonesian criminal procedure law through Law Number 20 of 2025 has transformed the legal framework for handling narcotics abusers. Article 82(i) excludes narcotics offenses from the restorative justice mechanism while providing an exception for narcotics users and abusers, thereby introducing a non-penal pathway that has never been regulated in previous criminal procedure codifications. This study aims to analyze the legal framework and normative limits of investigators' discretion in referring narcotics users and abusers to rehabilitation under Law Number 20 of 2025. The research employs a normative juridical method using statutory and conceptual approaches. Primary legal materials consist of Law Number 20 of 2025, Law Number 1 of 2023, and Law Number 35 of 2009, supported by secondary legal materials in the form of scholarly journals and legal doctrines. The analysis is conducted prescriptively through grammatical, systematic, and teleological interpretation. The findings reveal that Article 82(i) merely serves as an entry point for restorative justice eligibility rather than an independent legal basis for rehabilitation. The absence of definitions for narcotics users and abusers, the lack of linkage with Article 80, and the limitation of assessment procedures to women and vulnerable groups cause investigators' discretion to depend on scattered subordinate regulations, resulting in legal uncertainty and disparities in case handling. This study recommends the enactment of implementing regulations that establish criteria for narcotics users, an integrated assessment mechanism, and standards for supervising investigators' discretion to achieve the rehabilitative objectives of the post-codification legal framework.
Disparitas Perlindungan Hak Tersangka pada Penyidikan Pidana Militer dan Umum di Indonesia dalam Perspektif Keadilan Prosedural Antariksa Irawan; Ujuh Juhana
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1868

Abstract

Indonesia adopts a dual criminal justice system that differentiates the standards of protection for suspects' rights between the general and military justice systems. The enactment of the new Criminal Code (KUHP) and Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) has strengthened the protection of civil rights, while military criminal procedure continues to be governed by Law Number 31 of 1997, resulting in disparities that may conflict with the principle of equality before the law. This study aims to comparatively analyze the standards of protection for suspects' rights during the investigation stage in both systems based on the principle of justice. The study employed a normative juridical method using statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches. The primary legal materials consisted of Law Number 1 of 2023, Law Number 20 of 2025, Law Number 31 of 1997, and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The analysis was conducted using Rawls' Theory of Procedural Justice. The findings indicate that investigations within the general criminal justice system have fulfilled the principles of procedural justice through the expansion of pretrial review and the provision of legal assistance from the outset. In contrast, military criminal investigations remain constrained by the dominance of command authority, restrictions on the role of legal counsel, and the absence of external judicial oversight. Therefore, a revision of Law Number 31 of 1997 is necessary to ensure a fair trial.  
Analisis Yuridis Kekosongan Hukum Batas Waktu Penanganan Kanker dalam Sistem Rujukan BPJS Kesehatan Jasmine Layla Praspa; Sapto Hermawan; Abdul Kadir Jaelani
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1876

Abstract

Cancer is a time-critical disease where treatment delays severely threaten patient survival. Although the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the Health Law guarantee the right to quality healthcare, the National Health Insurance referral system implemented by BPJS Kesehatan currently faces a legal vacuum. This study aims to analyze the juridical urgency of the legal vacuum regarding the time limit for cancer treatment within the BPJS Kesehatan referral system, evaluated from the perspective of legal certainty and patients' constitutional rights. This normative legal research employs statutory and conceptual approaches. Data were collected through library research and analyzed using the deductive syllogism method. The findings reveal regulatory inconsistencies, particularly in BPJS Kesehatan Regulation Number 3 of 2024, which disrupts the referral chain without establishing binding clinical time limits for healthcare facilities. This absence of technical instruments destroys the hierarchy of legal certainty, leaving healthcare facilities trapped merely in administrative compliance. Consequently, patients endure fatal risks of delayed medical interventions due to prolonged waiting lists. The study implies that the government must immediately enact operational technical regulations stipulating absolute time limits for medical referrals, from diagnosis to treatment execution, to guarantee legal certainty and protect cancer patients in Indonesia.
Konsep Diversi dalam Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Anak Pelaku Kecelakaan Lalu Lintas yang Mengakibatkan Hilangnya Nyawa Orang Lain Dewi Nur Widayanti; Tegar Harbriyana Putra; Dwi Imroatus Sholikah
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1884

Abstract

 Traffic accidents involving juveniles that result in the death of another person have become an important issue in the juvenile criminal justice system. These cases raise questions regarding the limits of juvenile criminal liability and the effectiveness of diversion as an alternative to formal criminal proceedings. This study aims to examine the application of the ultimum remedium principle in the judicial considerations of Boyolali District Court Decision Number 1/Pid.Sus-Anak/2023/PN Byl and to analyze the factors influencing the implementation of diversion. This study employed an empirical juridical method using statutory, case, and empirical approaches. Data were collected through interviews and library research on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, and were analyzed qualitatively. The findings show that the judge applied criminal punishment as a last resort after diversion had been attempted in accordance with applicable legal provisions. However, diversion failed because of conflicting interests between the offender and the victim’s family, the severity of the consequences, and considerations of justice. The study concludes that successful diversion requires not only adequate legal provisions but also the willingness of the parties to achieve restorative justice while protecting children's rights, ensuring victims' interests, and maintaining legal certainty.
Diskresi Tanpa Impunitas: Rekonstruksi Pertanggungjawaban Hukum Anggota Polri atas Tindakan Diskresioner di Tingkat Kepolisian Sektor Ali Nursiswanto; Agus Rasyid Chandra Wijaya
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1886

Abstract

Police discretion under Article 18 of Law Number 2 of 2002 grants police officers authority to take actions based on their judgment for the public interest. At the sub-district police (Polsek) level, however, this authority is exercised in direct contact with the community while receiving relatively limited supervision, creating potential risks of abuse. This study examines the implementation of police discretion at Polsek Cidadap and identifies the legal accountability mechanisms governing discretionary actions. Using normative legal research with a descriptive-analytical approach, the study applies statutory, conceptual, and case analyses supported by primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials collected through literature and document review. Legal interpretation is conducted using grammatical, systematic, teleological, and historical methods, while qualitative analysis and deductive reasoning are employed to formulate conclusions. The findings indicate that lawful discretion must comply with legality, proportionality, accountability, human rights protection, and the principles of good governance. In practice, discretion may be exercised through conflict mediation, public order maintenance, and restorative justice. Conversely, actions exceeding authority or causing harm may result in administrative, disciplinary, ethical, civil, or criminal liability, reinforced through internal and external oversight mechanisms. The study recommends mandatory written justifications, improved documentation at the Polsek level, and clearer statutory standards for public interest and proportionality to ensure discretion promotes substantive justice while preserving legal certainty and equality before the law. The research also contributes by integrating discretion and accountability within a comprehensive framework focused on the underexplored Polsek level.
Rekonfigurasi Prosedur Penyidikan dan Perlindungan Tersangka dalam KUHAP Baru (Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2025) Ilham Hibatul Hakim; Ujuh Juhana
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1888

Abstract

Law Number 20 of 2025 introduced a new Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, replacing Law Number 8 of 1981 after more than forty years of application. The previous framework was widely criticized for limited judicial oversight, arbitrary suspect designation, and insufficient protection of suspects during criminal investigations. This study examines how the new legislation restructures investigative procedures and evaluates its impact on safeguarding suspects’ procedural rights. Employing normative legal research, the study applies statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Primary legal materials include Law Number 20 of 2025, Law Number 8 of 1981, and Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, while secondary materials consist of scholarly books, journal articles, and legal commentaries. Data were collected through document analysis and examined using descriptive and comparative qualitative methods. The findings show that the new Code establishes clearer procedural standards by regulating nine coercive measures, requiring at least two valid pieces of evidence and a formal case exposition before suspect determination, guaranteeing legal assistance from the beginning of the investigation, and requiring audiovisual recording of examinations. Although the proposal for a preliminary examining judge was omitted, Article 158 expands pre-trial review to include unlawful seizure, unreasonable investigative delay, and detention suspension. These reforms enhance due process and accountability, yet judicial supervision remains predominantly reactive, while outdated implementing regulations continue to create practical inconsistencies and normative uncertainty.
Defisit Kepastian Autentikasi Alat Bukti Elektronik dalam Penyidikan Delik Digital Pasca-Harmonisasi UU ITE dan KUHAP 2025 Reggy Indra Pratama; Ujuh Juhana
Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/konstitusi.v3i3.1905

Abstract

Digital transformation has shifted conventional crime into data-driven offenses, where electronic evidence is latent, fragile, and vulnerable to manipulation. Indonesia's Law Number 1 of 2024 on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE Law) and Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code both recognize electronic evidence, yet they originate from different legal regimes, creating challenges in normative harmonization during digital-crime investigations. This study examines the harmonization of electronic evidence between the ITE Law and the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code and evaluates its implications for legal certainty. This normative (doctrinal) legal research employs descriptive-analytical methods through statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Primary legal materials include the ITE Law and the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code, while secondary and tertiary materials consist of accredited legal scholarship, ISO/IEC 27037, and library sources analyzed qualitatively using deductive reasoning. The findings demonstrate that the two laws complement one another in recognizing electronic evidence, with the ITE Law extending evidentiary categories and the 2025 Code establishing electronic evidence as independent evidence requiring authentication. However, legal certainty remains limited because digital forensic procedures remain discretionary and no mandatory chain-of-custody standard exists, creating authentication asymmetry, particularly regarding AI-generated synthetic evidence. The study proposes operational harmonization through technical investigative guidelines, mandatory digital chain-of-custody standards, forensic certification, and mechanisms for verifying synthetic evidence to strengthen legal certainty and safeguard suspects' rights.

Page 16 of 16 | Total Record : 159

 12   13   14   15   16 

Filter by Year

2024 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): April : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): Januari : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Oktober : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 1 No. 4 (2024): Oktober : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 1 No. 3 (2024): Juli : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi Vol. 1 No. 2 (2024): April : Konstitusi : Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi