Publication Search

In this study, advocates are guaranteed legal protection to implement the right to defence in criminal cases.   to learn how criminal advocates are protected if they enforce the law.   The privilege of immunity shields advocates from civil or criminal litigation for good faith work inside and outside the court.   This study uses normative juridical research, which examines current laws and regulations.   Analysis of relevant legislation is needed for this research.   According to the study, Article 16 of Law Number 18 of 2003 concerning Advocates does not adequately describe advocates' immunity rights.   Lack of clear explanations of protection types, rights constraints, and good faith between advocates and other parties may lead to power abuses.   More extensive norms that are in keeping with other articles of the law are needed to apply advocates' immunity rights proportionately, guaranteeing freedom in performing their profession while maintaining society's and justice's legal interests.

In social practice, land sale and purchase transactions are still frequently conducted through private agreements, mainly driven by mutual trust between the parties, cost considerations, and the perception that such procedures are simpler and faster. From the perspective of civil law, such sale and purchase agreements remain valid and legally binding as long as they fulfill the legal requirements of a valid contract as stipulated in Article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code. However, within the national land law system, land sale and purchase agreements executed under private deeds cannot serve as a legal basis for the transfer of land rights because they are not made before a Land Deed Official (Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah/PPAT) as required by statutory regulations. This divergence in legal regulation gives rise to legal uncertainty, particularly for buyers acting in good faith. On the one hand, the agreement creates rights and obligations under civil law; on the other hand, it fails to provide legal certainty over land rights due to its inability to be registered. This condition reflects a tension between the civil law regime and the land law regime, while also indicating the weak legal protection afforded to good-faith buyers. These issues constitute the basis and urgency of this research.

The development of financial technology has driven significant transformations in the non-cash payment system in Indonesia, one of which is through the use of the Quick Response Code Indonesian Standard (QRIS). The use of QRIS in civil transactions relates not only to the technical aspects of payments but also has legal implications in the civil realm, particularly regarding the application of the principle of consensualism and the status of electronic evidence in the Indonesian civil procedural law system. This study aims to analyze the application of the principle of consensualism in QRIS e-payment transactions as electronic evidence in civil procedural law. The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory and conceptual approach. The results indicate that QRIS transactions meet the principle of consensualism due to the agreement of the parties, and QRIS can be qualified as a valid electronic document as long as it meets the requirements for electronic system reliability and information integrity as stipulated in laws and regulations. However, the evidentiary power of QRIS is not perfect and requires the support of other evidence, with the final assessment resting with the judge based on the principle of independent evidence in civil procedural law.

This study examines the Hybrid Model of Restorative Justice from a comparative perspective between Civil Law and Common Law systems as a reflection of the transformation of criminal law policy. The Civil Law system, rooted in legal positivism, emphasizes formal legal certainty through codification, whereas the Common Law system allows broader judicial discretion and judge-made law. These differing paradigms significantly influence the development and implementation of restorative justice. Indonesia, as a Civil Law country, has demonstrated a shift toward a hybrid legal policy by incorporating Common Law values into its criminal justice reforms, particularly through the National Criminal Code. This research employs a normative juridical method using conceptual, statutory, and comparative law approaches. The findings indicate that the Hybrid Model of Restorative Justice represents a strategic legal policy choice aimed at harmonizing legal certainty and substantive justice in accordance with the Pancasila legal ideals.

Discretion exercised by election management bodies constitutes an administrative instrument that is functionally necessary to prevent stagnation in electoral processes under conditions of legal vacuum, normative ambiguity, or extraordinary circumstances. However, in practice, discretionary decisions often generate public concern and expose election officials to the risk of criminalization, particularly when such discretion is assessed through a formalistic and result oriented criminal law paradigm. This study aims to analyze the construction of criminal liability of election administrators for the use of discretion in conditions of electoral stagnation, by examining the paradigm shift from the old Indonesian Criminal Code to the new Criminal Code and its implications for criminal law enforcement under the Criminal Procedure Code. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The findings reveal that the old Criminal Code tended to facilitate policy criminalization by emphasizing formal violations and objective consequences, whereas the new Criminal Code introduces a substantive approach centered on subjective fault, official purpose, and rationality of action. Nevertheless, the lack of synchronization with the Criminal Procedure Code which remains focused on conventional evidentiary standards causes discretionary actions of election administrators to remain legally ambiguous. Therefore, harmonization between substantive criminal law and criminal procedure law, along with a transformation in law enforcement reasoning, is essential to ensure that discretion exercised by election officials is assessed proportionally, contextually, and in line with democratic principles.

This research is grounded in the enactment of Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the National Criminal Code, which raises normative questions regarding the legal status of gratification within Indonesia’s anti-corruption framework. The study aims to analyze the normative position of gratification following criminal law codification and to assess its implications for evidentiary mechanisms under the Anti-Corruption Law. Employing a normative legal research method, this study applies statutory and conceptual approaches through comprehensive literature review of primary and secondary legal sources. The findings indicate that gratification remains regulated under the Anti-Corruption Law as lex specialis and is not nullified by the National Criminal Code. The reversal of the burden of proof mechanism continues to apply, although its interpretation must align with fundamental criminal law principles such as culpability and proportionality. The study concludes that systematic harmonization between both legal regimes is essential to ensure legal certainty and strengthen anti-corruption enforcement.

The reform of Indonesia’s criminal law through Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code (KUHP) marks a fundamental shift in the national criminal justice system, particularly through the formal recognition of the living law as law that lives within society. This article analyzes the correlation between living law and the principle of legality within the context of national criminal law reform. The study employs a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches to examine how the 2023 Criminal Code seeks to balance legal certainty with substantive justice. The findings indicate that the regulation of the principle of legality in Article 1 of the KUHP remains the primary foundation for ensuring the protection of individual rights and preventing arbitrary state actions. However, the recognition of living law under Article 2 of the KUHP expands the sources of criminal law beyond written statutes to include social values living within the community, insofar as they are consistent with Pancasila, general legal principles, and human rights. The relationship between the principle of legality and living law in the 2023 KUHP is not antagonistic but rather complementary and harmonious. Living law enriches the legality principle substantively through moral and social justice dimensions, while the legality principle serves as a normative safeguard to maintain legal certainty and prevent the abuse of power. Therefore, the integration of both principles reflects a new paradigm of Indonesian criminal law that is pluralistic, just, and civilized, reaffirming the nation’s legal politics grounded in Pancasila values and the principles of a democratic rule of law.

The enactment of Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code (KUHP) marks a historic milestone in the reform of Indonesia's criminal law system. This study examines the fundamental changes from the old Criminal Code (Wetboek van Strafrecht) to the new National Criminal Code, focusing on the paradigm shift from retributive justice to restorative justice as a form of law enforcement reform. Using a normative juridical method with a statutory and comparative approach, the study analyzes the philosophical, structural, and substantive transformation embedded in the new Criminal Code. The findings indicate that the new Criminal Code introduces significant reforms including the adoption of the dualistic theory separating criminal acts from criminal liability, the recognition of living law, the expansion of criminal subjects to include corporations, the formulation of sentencing guidelines based on restorative principles, and the integration of Pancasila values as the moral foundation of the criminal law system. The case of corruption prosecution involving the Chromebook laptop procurement at the Ministry of Education illustrates the ongoing challenges of criminal law enforcement during this transitional period. This research concludes that the transition from the old to the new Criminal Code constitutes a comprehensive legal reform that transforms not only normative substance but also the fundamental paradigm of criminal law enforcement in Indonesia

The crime of receiving stolen goods, as regulated in Article 480 of the Criminal Code (KUHP), is an offence that plays a crucial role in the continuation of the principal crime, particularly theft. Receivers provide a market for stolen goods, thereby indirectly encouraging perpetrators to continue their actions. This article aims to analyse the implementation of Article 480 of the KUHP in judicial practice, with a focus on proving the element of ‘knowing or reasonably suspecting’ that the goods purchased were obtained through criminal activity. This study uses a qualitative method with a case study approach through direct observation of a trial at the M. District Court. The observations show that the panel of judges successfully proved the defendant's guilt as a fence through a series of trial facts, such as the unreasonable purchase price, consistent testimony from the perpetrator of the theft, and the defendant's own admission that he had been suspicious. The judge's decision, which was lighter than the prosecutor's demands, also reflected considerations of substantive justice and humanity in addition to legal certainty. This study concludes that the effective enforcement of Article 480 of the Criminal Code in court plays an important role in breaking the chain of crime and providing a deterrent effect not only for the main perpetrators but also for those who participate in enjoying the proceeds of crime.

This study aims to examine the judge's considerations in rendering decisions in aggravated theft cases at the Medan District Court, with an emphasis on the balance between legal and non-legal aspects in realizing substantive justice. The issue of disparate sentencing that frequently arises is the main background of this study. The methods used are an integrated normative legal approach and an empirical legal approach. The normative approach is used to examine the provisions of Article 363 of the Criminal Code (KUHP) and the legal principles that govern the judge's considerations, while the empirical approach is carried out through direct observation of the trial process and analysis of the judge's decision. The results of the study indicate that the judge in case Number 1110/Pid. B/2025/PN Medan not only complied with legal aspects such as fulfilling the elements of the crime, evidence, and the application of the principle of legality, but also considered non-legal aspects such as the socio-economic conditions, age, and motives of the defendant. These considerations demonstrate the application of the principles of criminal individualization and proportional justice. In addition, the judge also considered moral values ​​and social benefits in his decision, which is in line with Gustav Radbruch's theory of three basic legal values: justice, legal certainty, and utility. This study concludes that the thinking patterns of judges at the Medan District Court reflect a shift toward substantive and restorative justice paradigms. It is recommended that the Supreme Court strengthen integrated sentencing guidelines to avoid disparities in sentencing and encourage the adoption of a rehabilitative approach for offenders with low economic motivations.

An agreement is a fundamental basis in civil law relations because it gives rise to rights and obligations for the parties who bind themselves. For an agreement to be valid, consent must arise from the free will of the parties without any defect of will as regulated in Articles 1320 and 1321 of the Indonesian Civil Code (KUHPerdata). In Indonesian legal practice, apart from classic defects of will such as coercion (dwang), mistake (dwaling), and fraud (bedrog), a modern form of defect of will has also developed, namely abuse of circumstances (misbruik van omstandigheden). Abuse of circumstances occurs when one party exploits the weak condition, dependency, or ignorance of the other party to obtain unfair advantage in an agreement. This research formulates the problems of how the concept of defect of will in abuse of circumstances is applied in the jurisprudence of Indonesian contract law and what are the legal consequences of abuse of circumstances in an agreement. The method used is normative legal research with a statutory approach and conceptual approach, as well as related legal literature. The conclusion of this research shows that abuse of circumstances is a modern form of defect of will recognized through doctrine and jurisprudence. The legal consequence is that the agreement can be annulled because the element of free consent is not fulfilled. This legal consequence provides protection for the aggrieved party and confirms that the principle of freedom of contract is not absolute, but is limited by good faith, propriety, and balance.

The Cash on Delivery (COD) system is one of the payment methods frequently used in online buying and selling transactions, where consumers pay for ordered products upon receipt of the goods. Although it provides convenience, this system often causes problems, especially related to transaction cancellations by consumers after the delivery process has been carried out by business actors. This research examines how the regulation and allocation of risk for goods return in the COD system according to the Civil Code and the forms of legal protection provided to business actors against the risk of goods return in the COD system according to Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection. The method used in this research is normative, supplemented by literature study results such as legislation. The results show that the Civil Code recognizes the concept of risk as a legal consequence related to the possibility of losses on the object of the agreement, and legal protection for business actors is divided into preventive legal protection and repressive legal protection.

This study examines the distortion between civil and criminal perspectives in the legal considerations (ratio decidendi) of Judex Juris in Supreme Court Decision Number 121K/Pid.Sus/2020. The decision lacks substantial criminal law considerations regarding the alleged corruption offense. Instead, the legal reasoning focuses on the fault or negligence of company directors, particularly the exception under Article 97 of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies, which embodies the Business Judgment Rule doctrine. Furthermore, these considerations are distorted by tort (onrechtmatige daad) as regulated in Article 1365 of the Civil Code juncto Article 138 paragraph (1) letter b of the Company Law. This research employs a legislative approach by analyzing various legal instruments, including the 1945 Constitution, the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Limited Liability Company Law, State-Owned Enterprises Law, Judicial Power Law, Supreme Court Law, and the Corruption Eradication Laws. A conceptual approach is also utilized to examine theoretical concepts concerning corporate crime, directors' liabilities, state losses, tort, negligence from criminal and civil perspectives, business judgment rules, collective collegiality principles, and formal-material classification of legislation. The data comprises primary legal materials (legislation and court decisions) and secondary legal materials (legal literature and scientific journals). Analysis is conducted qualitatively by interpreting legal principles and their relevance to the court's considerations in the decision.

This research is motivated by the phenomenon of theft committed by 15-year-old adolescents in market environments, which creates tension between criminal law enforcement and the principle of child protection in the Indonesian legal system. The study aims to analyze the legal regulations of theft under the old Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 1946), the new Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023), and the Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law; to examine the criminal liability of adolescents from the perspective of criminal law theory; and to review the implementation of restorative justice and diversion. The research method used is normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, particularly reviewing the provisions of Article 591 of the new Criminal Code, the theory of fault, and the principle of proportionality. The results indicate that the criminal liability of children must take into account psychological limitations, maturity levels, and criminogenic factors, including the influence of the social environment. Furthermore, the mens rea element in the phrase "known or reasonably suspected" is difficult to apply in practice to transactions involving small losses, as price reasonableness can obscure indications of malicious intent. This finding affirms that imposing criminal penalties on children in cases of petty theft potentially contradicts the principles of ultimum remedium and proportionality. Therefore, law enforcement should prioritize diversion, mediation, and restorative justice approaches by involving families and communities to achieve substantive justice and prevent excessive criminalization of children.

This study analyzes the construction of criminal liability in the crime of handling stolen goods, focusing on situations where the perpetrator purchases or receives goods without knowing they are the result of a crime, especially when the economic value is relatively small, i.e., below Rp5,000,000. This normative study uses a legislative approach by examining Article 591 of Law Number 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code (KUHP), as well as a conceptual approach to the theory of fault (schuld) and the principle of proportionality. The study's findings show that in transactions involving low-value goods, proving the subjective element of "knowing or should have known" becomes highly problematic because the element of intent (dolus) is often not met without objective suspicious indications. The concept of price fairness plays a key role as the primary indicator of normal transactions and weakens the assumption that the perpetrator should suspect the illegal origin of the goods. This study recommends that law enforcement consider using non-criminal mechanisms, such as restitution or mediation, to achieve substantive justice and avoid excessive criminalization.

This is related to the rights of traffic accident victims regulated in Article 240 of Law 22 of 2009 concerning Road Traffic and Transportation "traffic accident victims have the right to receive compensation from the party responsible and are entitled to insurance compensation from the insurance company". Article 1365 of the Civil Code, every person who commits an unlawful act is obliged to compensate for the losses arising from his or her mistake. In fact, many accidents occur due to damaged roads in Samarinda City, so this is one of the factors causing traffic accidents.The aim of this research is to answer two things. First, to find out and examine unlawful acts by the authorities in cases of traffic accidents due to damaged roads. Second, we want to know and examine the legal responsibilities of road operators. In this part of the research, we review and explore the relevant laws that regulate and are relevant to claims for compensation against road operators by victims of traffic accidents due to damaged roads.The results obtained from this research are as follows: 1) In this case, the occurrence of traffic accidents in terms of the last 5 years continues to show a significant increase, which means that the government has not maximally provided the community's rights, namely to have good roads. One of the causes of accidents is damaged roads, but to date no member of the public has filed a civil lawsuit against the government for compensation for the pain they suffered. 2) The government's regulations and efforts to provide protection for road users are sufficient, but they are not implemented optimally, in fact the public has never been given an appeal to demand their rights to receive good roads.  

The concept of force majeure is essential in business agreements in Indonesia, as it regulates the release of contractual obligations that cannot be fulfilled due to events beyond their control such as natural disasters, pandemics, conflicts, or government policies. This study examines force majeure clauses in business agreements in Indonesia from a normative juridical perspective, focusing on the legal framework, its application practices, and its legal implications for contractual certainty. Using normative juridical qualitative methods, data were analyzed from the Civil Code (KUHPerdata) Articles 1244–1245 and 1444–1445, legal doctrine, and literature. The results of the study underlined that the force majeure clause has a strong legal basis in the Civil Code, which exempts the affected party from the obligation of compensation if the failure to perform the obligation is caused by events beyond his control. The application of this clause in the contract allows for the revision, postponement, or termination of a temporary contract, thereby guaranteeing legal certainty and protecting the principles of good faith and contractual fairness. In addition, the formulation of detailed clauses in the contract is crucial to prevent potential legal disputes down the road and ensure fair protection for all parties involved in the business agreement.

The crime of receiving stolen goods, as regulated in Article 480 of the Criminal Code (KUHP), is an offence that plays a crucial role in the continuation of the principal crime, particularly theft. Receivers provide a market for stolen goods, thereby indirectly encouraging perpetrators to continue their actions. This paper investigates how Article 480 of the KUHP in judicial practice, with a focus on proving the element of ‘knowing or reasonably suspecting’ that the goods purchased were obtained through criminal activity. This study uses a qualitative method with a case study approach through direct observation of a trial at the M. District Court. The observations show that the panel of judges successfully proved the defendant's guilt as a fence through a series of trial facts, such as the unreasonable purchase price, consistent testimony from the perpetrator of the theft, and the defendant's own admission that he had been suspicious. The judge's decision, which was lighter than the prosecutor's demands, also reflected considerations of substantive justice and humanity in addition to legal certainty. This study concludes that the effective enforcement of Article 480 of the Criminal Code in court plays an important role in breaking the chain of crime and providing a deterrent effect not only for the main perpetrators but also for those who participate in enjoying the proceeds of crime.  

This study aims to analyze the factors causing the differences in legal treatment and their implications on the principles of equality before the law, legal certainty, and the principle of legality. The method used is empirical legal research with a juridical-sociological approach. This study involves case studies, interviews with law enforcement officers and victim advocates, as well as an analysis of regulations and court decisions. The results indicate that the differences in legal treatment are caused by the application of subjective detention requirements in the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), law enforcement discretion, differing legal interpretations between prosecutors and judges, the quality of legal assistance for defendants, and social pressures and societal dynamics. The impact of these differences is the failure to achieve substantive justice, weakening legal certainty, and declining public trust in the criminal justice system. This research has significant academic urgency as it contributes to the development of the enforcement of laws regarding Human Trafficking (TPPO), emphasizing the need for consistency, transparency, and the protection of victims' rights in the application of criminal law.

This study examines the renewal of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) Baru as an effort to synchronize with the Criminal Code (KUHP) 2023, as well as analyzing crucial articles that potentially cause legal uncertainty in the criminal justice process in Indonesia. Using a juridical-normative method with a descriptive-analytical approach, this research analyzes secondary data from primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The results show that KUHAP Baru successfully addresses some of the mismatches with KUHP 2023 through regulations on alternative punishments, corporate accountability, and protection for vulnerable groups, but still faces conceptual and technical challenges such as legislative disharmony and minimal public participation. On the other hand, crucial articles such as Articles 5, 16, 74, 90, 93, 105, 112A, 124, 132A, and 137A pose risks of legal uncertainty due to the expansion of law enforcement authority without adequate oversight, which can violate the due process principle and human rights. The study's conclusion emphasizes the need for further revisions to strengthen legal certainty and harmonize the criminal justice system.