cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
-
Contact Email
-
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
-
Editorial Address
-
Location
Kota denpasar,
Bali
INDONESIA
Kertha Semaya
Published by Universitas Udayana
ISSN : -     EISSN : -     DOI : -
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
E-Journal Kertha Semaya merupakan jurnal elektronik yang dimiliki oleh Program Studi Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Udayana. Materi muatan jurnal ini memfokuskan diri pada tulisan-tulisan ilmiah menyangkut lapangan Hukum Perdata atau Bisnis. Secara spesifik, topik-topik yang menjadi tema sentral jurnal ini meliputi antara lain: Hukum Perikatan, Hukum Perlindungan Konsumen, Hukum Perbankan, Hukum Investasi, Hukum Pasar Modal, Hukum Perusahaan, Hukum Pengangkutan, Hukum Asuransi, Hukum Hak atas Kekayaan Intelektual, dan Hukum Perburuhan.
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 15 Documents
 1   2 
Search results for , issue "Vol 8 No 6 (2020)" : 15 Documents clear
TINJAUAN KEWENANGAN ANTARA SATPOL PP DAN POLRI DALAM MENCIPTAKAN KETERTIBAN DAN KEAMANAN Ni Ketut Hevy Yushantini
Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 6 (2020)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (177.604 KB)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze first the authority of Satpol PP in creating public order and public peace; secondly, Polri's authority in creating public order and public order; third, differences in law enforcement authority between Satpol PP and Polri in creating public order and public peace. The research method used is empirical juridical legal research using a statutory, conceptual, and comparative approach. The results showed first, the authority of Satpol PP in creating public order and public peace where the normative juridical reference to public order and public peace was Article 11 PP No. 16 of 2018; second, the authority of the Polri in creating public order and peace of society by means of maintaining security and public order, law enforcement, protection and services to the public; third, differences in law enforcement authority between Satpol PP and Polri in creating public order and peace of society is if Satpol PP has the authority to maintain public order, while the National Police is more concerned with maintaining domestic security. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk menganalisis pertama, kewenangan Satpol PP dalam menciptakan ketertiban umum dan ketentraman masyarakat; kedua, kewenangan Polri dalam menciptakan ketertiban umum dan ketentraman masyarakat; ketiga, perbedaan kewenangan penegakan hukum antara Satpol PP dan Polri dalam menciptakan ketertiban umum dan ketentraman masyarakat. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum yuridis empiris dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, perbandingan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pertama, kewenangan Satpol PP dalam menciptakan ketertiban umum dan ketentraman masyarakat dimana acuan yuridis normatif mengenai ketertiban umum dan ketentraman masyarakat adalah Pasal 11 PP No. 16 Tahun 2018; kedua, kewenangan Polri dalam menciptakan ketertiban umum dan ketentraman masyarakat dengan cara pemeliharaan keamanan dan ketertiban masyarakat, penegakan hukum, perlindungan, pengayoman dan pelayanan kepada masyarakat; ketiga, perbedaan kewenangan penegakan hukum antara Satpol PP dan Polri dalam menciptakan ketertiban umum dan ketentraman masyarakat adalah jika Satpol PP berwenang dalam menjaga ketertiban umum, sedangkan Polri lebih menjaga terpeliharanya keamanan dalam negeri.
KEWENANGAN KEJAKSAAN MENGAJUKAN PERMOHONAN PEMBUBARAN PERSEROAN TERBATAS I Bagus Putra Gede Agung
Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 6 (2020)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (160.893 KB)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze first the authority of the Prosecutor's Office submitting a request to dissolve a Limited Liability Company; and second, the criteria for violating the public interest as a basis or reason for submitting a petition for the liquidation of a limited company by the prosecutor. The research method used is normative juridical legal research using a statutory and conceptual. The results showed first, the authority of the Prosecutor's Office submitting a petition for the dissolution of a Limited Liability Company is regulated in the opening of paragraph IV of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which contains the aim of the State to create public welfare, public order. If there is a Limited Liability Company that can hamper the State's objective, then the State gives the authority to the Prosecutor's Office. The Attorney General's Office as a Lawyer for requesting that Disbursement; and second, the criteria for Public Interest Violations by Limited Liability Companies according to the Prosecutor's Office include interfering with the interests of the state, the wider community, and the interests of the nation. Then the Prosecutor's Office must be thorough and know what the criteria for Public Interest Violations are based on various laws that govern what is the public interest. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk menganalisis pertama, kewenangan Kejaksaan mengajukan permohonan pembubaran Perseroan Terbatas; dan kedua, kriteria pelanggaran kepentingan umum sebagai dasar atau alasan pengajuan permohonan Pembubaran Perseroan Terbatas oleh Kejaksaan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pertama, kewenangan Kejaksaan mengajukan permohonan pembubaran Perseroan Terbatas diatur dalam pembukaan alinea ke IV UUD NRI 1945 yang berisi tujuan Negara ialah menciptakan kesejahteraan umum, ketertiban umum. Apabila terdapat Perseroan Terbatas yang dapat menghambat tujuan Negara, maka Negara memberikan kewenangan kepada Kejaksaan. Kejaksaan sebagai Pengacara Negara untuk memohonkan Pembubaran tersebut; dan kedua, kriteria Pelanggaran Kepentingan Umum yang dilakukan Perseroan Terbatas menurut Kejaksaan antara lain mencakup mengganggu kepentingan negara, masyarakat luas, kepentingan bangsa. Maka Kejaksaan harus teliti dan mengetahui apa saja kriteria Pelanggaran Kepentingan Umum berdasarkan dari berbagai Undang-Undang yang mengatur mengenai apa itu kepentingan umum.
PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN SELEBGRAM TERHADAP KONSUMEN YANG MEMPROMOSIKAN BARANG DAN JASA DI MEDIA SOSIAL Dewa Ayu Kade Wida Suryandini; Suatra Putrawan
Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 6 (2020)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (215.09 KB)

Abstract

This paper aims to know the existent of a regulation in Indonesia which controls Instagram Influencers who advertise products through social media and to explain the responsibility of Instagram Influencers towards the products they promote. This writing uses normative legal research method, which relies on regulations and conceptual approach. Findings revealed that the Press Act Number 40 of 1999 has not regulate the social media advertisements, including Instagram influencers. According to the Broadcasting Act Number 32 of 2002, there is no certain article in this Act which prohibits false advertising. Nevertheless, according to the Food Act Number 18 of 2012, it specifically regulates regarding false or misleading advertisements. Moreover, According to the Government Regulation Number 69 of 1999 on Food Labels and Advertisements, it is prohibited to advertise a product for infants up to 1 (one) year old. Furthermore, In accordance with Article 8 to 17 of the Consumer Protection Act Number 8 of 1999, specifically regulates legal protection. Thus aforementioned articles can be a consideration for Instagram Influencer to receive legal protection. Broadcasting institution is responsible for the content of their adverts. However, broadcasting institution in this context means any types of advertising media, including Instagram Influencers who promoted products through social media. Keywords: Advertisement, Instagram Influencer, Responsibility.
RELEVANSI SANKSI PIDANA BAGI KORUPTOR YANG MERUGIKAN KEUANGAN DAN ATAU PEREKONOMIAN NEGARA I Kadek Wahyudi Ardika
Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 6 (2020)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (380.542 KB)

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the relevance of the sanctions contained in Article 2 of the PTPK Law for corruptors who are state administrators and to analyze whether Article 2 of the PTPK Law can be used to ensnare these actors. This study method uses the normative legal research method. The study results show that sanctions in Article 2 of the PTPK Law are more relevant to corruptors who have the status of state administrators compared to sanctions contained in Article 3 of the PTPK Law because they are more proportional, and Article 2 of the PTPK Law can be applied to corruptors who are state administrators even though. Studi ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis relevansi sanksi yang termuat dalam Pasal 2 UU PTPK bagi koruptor yang berstatus sebagai penyelenggara negara dan untuk menganalisis apakah Pasal 2 UU PTPK dapat digunakan untuk menjerat pelaku tersebut. Metode studi ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif. Hasil studi menunjukkan bahwa sanksi Pasal 2 UU PTPK lebih relevan dikenakan bagi koruptor yang bertatus sebagai penyelenggara negara dibandingkan dengan sanksi yang termuat dalam Pasal 3 UU PTPK karena lebih proporsional, dan Pasal 2 UU PTPK dapat diterapkan bagi koruptor yang berstatus sebagai penyelenggara negara sekalipun.
AKIBAT HUKUM PENJAMIN YANG MELEPASKAN HAK ISTIMEWA DALAM PERJANJIAN PENANGGUNGAN YANG DIBUAT SECARA LISAN Ni Wayan Arika Cintya Angga Dewi; I Putu Rasmadi Arsha Putra
Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 6 (2020)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (187.719 KB)

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the binding strength of the suretyship agreement orally and to knowing the legal consequences of the guarantor who relinquishes the privileges in the suretyship agreement orally. This study uses normative legal research methods with a statute approach and a conceptual approach. The study result show that the obscurity of the norms of Article 1824 of the Civil Code has the potential diverged by the guarantor when the oral agreement can only be difficult for creditors in executing the assets of the guarantor and difficult to prove if resolved through litigation. Thus, the binding force of the written agreement orally is still weak because it does not have binding power to third parties so that it requires supporting evidence. The relinquishment of the guarantor's privileges results in the creditor being able to directly execute the guarantor's assets without the sale of the debtor's assets. Keywords : Legal Consequences, Special Rights, Oral Suretyship Agreement

Page 2 of 2 | Total Record : 15

 1   2 

Filter by Year

2020 2020


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 12 No 10 (2024) Vol 12 No 9 (2024) Vol 12 No 8 (2024) Vol 12 No 7 (2024) Vol 12 No 6 (2024) Vol 12 No 5 (2024) Vol 12 No 4 (2024) Vol 12 No 3 (2024) Vol 12 No 2 (2024) Vol 11 No 12 (2023) Vol 11 No 11 (2023) Vol 11 No 10 (2023) Vol 12 No 1 (2023) Vol 11 No 9 (2023) Vol 11 No 8 (2023) Vol 11 No 7 (2023) Vol 11 No 6 (2023) Vol 11 No 5 (2023) Vol 11 No 4 (2023) Vol 11 No 3 (2023) Vol 11 No 2 (2023) Vol 10 No 12 (2022) Vol 10 No 11 (2022) Vol 10 No 10 (2022) Vol 11 No 1 (2022) Vol 10 No 9 (2022) Vol 10 No 8 (2022) Vol 10 No 7 (2022) Vol 10 No 6 (2022) Vol 10 No 5 (2022) Vol 10 No 4 (2022) Vol 10 No 3 (2022) Vol 10 No 2 (2022) Vol 9 No 12 (2021) Vol 9 No 11 (2021) Vol 9 No 10 (2021) Vol 10 No 1 (2021) Vol 9 No 9 (2021) Vol 9 No 8 (2021) Vol 9 No 7 (2021) Vol 9 No 6 (2021) Vol 9 No 5 (2021) Vol 9 No 4 (2021) Vol 9 No 3 (2021) Vol 9 No 2 (2021) Vol 8 No 12 (2020) Vol 8 No 11 (2020) Vol 8 No 10 (2020) Vol 9 No 1 (2020) Vol 8 No 9 (2020) Vol 8 No 8 (2020) Vol 8 No 7 (2020) Vol 8 No 6 (2020) Vol 8 No 5 (2020) Vol 8 No 4 (2020) Vol 8 No 3 (2020) Vol 8 No 2 (2020) Vol 7 No 12 (2019) Vol 7 No 11 (2019) Vol 7 No 10 (2019) Vol 8 No 1 (2019) Vol 7 No 9 (2019) Vol 7 No 8 (2019) Vol 7 No 7 (2019) Vol 7 No 6 (2019) Vol 7 No 5 (2019) Vol 7 No 4 (2019) Vol 7 No 3 (2019) Vol 7 No 2 (2019) Vol 6 No 12 (2018) Vol 6 No 11 (2018) Vol 6 No 10 (2018) Vol 7 No 1 (2018) Vol 6 No 9 (2018) Vol 6 No 8 (2018) Vol 6 No 7 (2018) Vol 6 No 6 (2018) Vol 6 No 5 (2018) Vol 6 No 4 (2018) Vol 6 No 3 (2018) Vol 6 No 2 (2018) Vol 6 No 1 (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. 03, No. 03, Mei 2015 Vol. 03, No. 02, Januari 2015 Vol. 03, No. 01, Januari 2015 Vol. 02, No. 06, Oktober 2014 Vol. 02, No. 05, Juli 2014 Vol. 02, No. 04, Juni 2014 Vol. 02, No. 03, Juni 2014 Vol. 02, No. 02, Februari 2014 Vol. 02, No. 01, Februari 2014 Vol. 01, No. 12, November 2013 Vol. 01, No. 11, November 2013 Vol. 01, No. 10, Oktober 2013 Vol. 01, No. 09, September 2013 Vol. 01, No. 08, September 2013 Vol. 01, No. 07, Juli 2013 Vol. 01, No. 06, Juli 2013 Vol. 01, No. 05, Juli 2013 Vol. 01, No. 04, Mei 2013 Vol. 01, No. 03, Mei 2013 Vol. 01, No. 02, Februari 2013 Vol. 01, No. 01, Januari 2013 More Issue