Publication Search

Kepastian hukum dalam pembuatan akta autentik merupakan aspek penting dalam sistem hukum perdata di Indonesia, terutama dalam menjamin perlindungan hukum bagi para pihak. Namun, dalam praktiknya, notaris seringkali dihadapkan pada permasalahan hukum yang berkaitan dengan batas pertanggungjawaban administratif dan pidana. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis bentuk pelanggaran notaris dalam pembuatan akta autentik serta implikasi yuridisnya berdasarkan putusan pengadilan. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan kasus, melalui analisis bahan hukum sekunder dan putusan pengadilan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pelanggaran notaris pada dasarnya bersifat administratif, kecuali terdapat unsur kesengajaan atau keterlibatan aktif dalam tindak pidana. Selain itu, terdapat perbedaan penafsiran dalam putusan pengadilan yang menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum. Penelitian ini menegaskan pentingnya kejelasan batas pertanggungjawaban notaris guna menjamin kepastian hukum dan perlindungan profesi notaris

Regulatory overlap between the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, the Pornography Law, and the Sexual Violence Crimes Law in the handling of online gender-based violence (KBGO) in Indonesia creates a conflict of norms that results in double victimization. This normative legal study aims to identify the concrete forms of victim sacrifice resulting from overlapping regulations and to critique the inability of conflict-resolution mechanisms to address these conflicts through the principle of lex specialis systematica from a substantive justice perspective. The findings reveal four forms of victim sacrifice: victim criminalization, the length of the judicial process, inconsistencies in court rulings, and the failure to fulfill the right to restitution and the right to be forgotten. This study also concludes that the lex specialis systematis principle is inadequate because its dogmatic approach disregards the interests of victims, requires time and expertise that ordinary victims lack, and is not consistently applied in courts. This study recommends a paradigm shift from a dogmatic approach to a victim-centered approach.

This study aims to analyze the position of customary law in the new Criminal Code and the integration of restorative justice in resolving criminal cases in Indonesia. The method used is a qualitative approach with normative juridical research through legislative and conceptual approaches. The results indicate that the new Criminal Code recognizes living law, including customary law, as part of the national legal system. However, its status remains complementary and subordinate to state law. The integration of restorative justice into the criminal justice system is a progressive step that emphasizes restoring relationships between perpetrators, victims, and the community. This approach aligns with customary law values ​​that prioritize deliberation, balance, and social harmony. However, its implementation still faces various challenges, such as unclear regulations, limited official capacity, and potential conflicts with human rights principles. Therefore, regulatory strengthening, procedural standardization, and institutional capacity building are needed to ensure the integration of customary law and restorative justice can be implemented effectively, fairly, and sustainably within the Indonesian criminal justice system.

Pemberlakuan Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2025 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana membawa perubahan penting dalam sistem peradilan pidana Indonesia, khususnya pada mekanisme pembuktian dan kewenangan penyidikan. Perubahan tersebut juga berdampak terhadap profesi yang berkaitan erat dengan dokumen hukum, termasuk notaris sebagai pejabat umum yang berwenang membuat akta otentik. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis implikasi pemberlakuan Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2025 terhadap tanggung jawab pidana notaris dalam pembuatan akta otentik. Permasalahan yang dikaji meliputi bagaimana KUHAP Baru memengaruhi kedudukan notaris dalam proses pidana serta bagaimana pertanggungjawaban pidana notaris diterapkan terhadap akta otentik yang bermasalah. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan perbandingan. Bahan hukum terdiri atas bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier yang dianalisis secara kualitatif melalui penafsiran hukum dan penalaran sistematis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2025 tidak membentuk delik baru bagi notaris, melainkan memperluas instrumen acara pidana melalui pengakuan informasi elektronik, dokumen elektronik, perluasan definisi saksi, dan mekanisme penyitaan modern. Akibatnya, notaris berpotensi lebih sering terlibat dalam proses penyidikan dan pembuktian pidana. Namun demikian, tanggung jawab pidana notaris tetap didasarkan pada terpenuhinya unsur tindak pidana dan kesalahan pribadi, bukan semata-mata karena akta otentik yang dibuat menjadi sengketa. Penelitian ini menawarkan model pengaturan yang seimbang antara akuntabilitas pidana, kepastian hukum, kerahasiaan jabatan, dan kepercayaan masyarakat terhadap lembaga kenotariatan.

The legal arrangement of cannabis in Indonesia is based on Article 28H paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia which guarantees the right to health services, elaborated through Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics and Law Number 17 of 2023 concerning Health. Cannabis is classified as a Group I narcotic prohibited for health services under Article 8 paragraph (1) of Law Number 35 of 2009, while Article 139 of Law Number 17 of 2023 requires that the use of medicines containing narcotics may only be carried out based on a prescription from medical personnel. At the same time, Canada through the Cannabis Act (S.C. 2018, c. 16) and Uruguay through Ley No. 19.172 (2013) apply fundamentally different legal arrangements for cannabis. This research uses normative legal research methods with a comparative law approach, applying the criminal policy framework of Marc Ancel and the law enforcement theory of Joseph Goldstein. The results show: (1) cannabis arrangement in Indonesia is prohibitive through Article 8 paragraph (1) of Law Number 35 of 2009, while Article 6 paragraph (3) opens a mechanism for reclassification through Ministerial Regulation; (2) Canada through the Cannabis Act applies a regulated market model with a CAD 11.4 billion legal industry and a 70% reduction in arrests, while Uruguay through Ley No. 19.172 applies a state monopoly with an 85% reduction in arrests without an increase in problematic use; (3) fundamental differences in legal systems, political systems, socio-cultural backgrounds, religion, and narcotics policy philosophy mean that the Canadian and Uruguayan models are not relevant to be directly applied in the Indonesian criminal law system.

This study aims to analyze the factors causing children to become involved in narcotics abuse, the judges’ considerations in delivering verdicts, and the conformity of such decisions with applicable legal provisions. This research employs a normative juridical method with a descriptive-analytical approach, based on literature review and analysis of Decision Number 3/Pid.Sus-Anak/2021/PN Bnt. The results indicate that children’s involvement in narcotics-related crimes is influenced by multidimensional factors, namely economic, environmental, and legal factors. Economic factors include family financial pressure; environmental factors involve peer influence and lack of parental supervision; while legal factors relate to limited understanding of legal consequences. Judges’ considerations in rendering decisions are not only based on juridical aspects but also take into account the social and psychological conditions of the child. However, the imposition of imprisonment is considered not fully aligned with the principles of restorative justice and child protection. Therefore, it is necessary to optimize the implementation of diversion and non-penal approaches in the juvenile justice system.  

This study discusses the reform of criminal law regarding acts of abuse of power within the Indonesian legal system. Abuse of power committed by public officials constitutes a serious violation of the rule of law and the principle of equality before the law because it can harm society and weaken public trust in the government. The old Criminal Code inherited from the colonial era was considered incapable of providing an optimal deterrent effect against perpetrators of abuse of authority. Therefore, the enactment of Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the New Criminal Code became an important step in the reform of criminal law in Indonesia. This study aims to analyze criminal law reform policies in overcoming abuse of power and the effectiveness of their implementation in law enforcement. The results show that the new Criminal Code expands regulations regarding abuse of authority with stricter criminal sanctions and additional penalties in the form of revocation of office rights. However, its implementation still faces challenges such as political intervention, low integrity of law enforcement officials, and the potential overlap with the Corruption Eradication Law. Therefore, the success of criminal law reform requires the support of legal substance, legal structure, and legal culture that work in harmony.

Criminal law socialization is a crucial form of community empowerment in building awareness, compliance, and legal order in the social environment. This activity is motivated by the limited understanding among some members of the public regarding what constitutes a crime, the potential legal consequences, and the appropriate steps to take when facing legal issues. This lack of legal literacy can leave people vulnerable to committing violations, becoming victims of crime, or resolving conflicts in ways that are inconsistent with legal provisions. Therefore, this socialization activity aims to provide a basic understanding of criminal law, raise public awareness of the importance of obeying the law, and encourage active community participation in creating a safe, orderly, and just environment. The activity is implemented through counseling, interactive discussions, questions and answers, and the presentation of simple case studies relevant to everyday life. The material presented includes the definition of criminal law, types of crimes frequently occurring in society, legal sanctions, the rights and obligations of citizens, and the role of the community in preventing legal violations. Through a communicative and participatory approach, it is hoped that the community will more easily understand the material and be able to connect it to real-world problems in their environment. The expected outcomes of this activity are increased public understanding of criminal law, increased awareness to avoid unlawful acts, and increased public courage to report criminal acts to the authorities. Thus, criminal law socialization serves not only as an educational activity but also as a community empowerment strategy in building a legal culture. This activity is expected to encourage the formation of a legally aware, responsible community that plays an active role in creating a law-abiding environment.

This article aims to reconstruct legal awareness and social justice in the context of a contemporary rule of law through the integration of economic law, digital law, civil law, criminal law, and constitutional law within the framework of citizenship rights and Islamic Sociological Jurisprudence Theory. The main problem of this research stems from the fact that the development of the modern legal system tends to be sectoral, formalistic, and not fully responsive to social change, unequal access to justice, and digital transformation that affects the relationship between citizens and the law. This research uses a normative legal research method with a conceptual, legislative, and sociological approach. The results of the study indicate that legal awareness is not simply understood as formal compliance with norms, but must be developed as a substantive awareness oriented towards social justice, protection of citizenship rights, and public welfare. From the perspective of Islamic Sociological Jurisprudence, law is positioned not only as a regulatory instrument, but also as a means of social transformation based on the values ​​of justice, moral responsibility, and siding with the interests of society. Integration across legal branches is crucial for the legal system to more comprehensively address issues related to economics, digitalization, civil relations, criminal enforcement, and state governance. Therefore, the reconstruction of legal awareness must be directed toward establishing a legal paradigm that is integrative, humanistic, adaptive, and socially just.

dishonorable Discharge (PTDH) is the most severe administrative sanction for Civil Servants (PNS) proven to have committed corruption. This study aims to analyze the implementation of PTDH for corrupt civil servants and identify the obstacles in its execution. Using a normative legal research method with statutory, conceptual, and case study approaches, this study examines the effectiveness of PTDH through Lawrence M. Friedman's Legal System Theory, which includes legal substance, legal structure, and legal culture. The results show that, in terms of substance, the PTDH norm is strictly regulated in Government Regulation Number 17 of 2020. However, its implementation faces juridical, administrative, institutional, and socio-political obstacles, as reflected in the case of the delayed execution of PTDH for five civil servants in Mukomuko Regency. This phenomenon proves the existence of a gap between law in the books and law in action. Friedman's perspective explains that the failure of PTDH is caused by weaknesses in the legal structure (apparatus/executing institutions) and legal culture (integrity/ethics of the apparatus). This study concludes that the effectiveness of PTDH can only be achieved through synergy between firm legal substance, professional legal structure, and a legal culture that upholds the integrity of state apparatus.

Human Trafficking (TPPO) has undergone a significant transformation in its modus operandi alongside the massive use of information technology, giving rise to the phenomenon of cyber-recruitment within the online scam industry. This study aims to analyze the juridical construction of the criminal elements in the cyber-recruitment modus operandi based on Law Number 21 of 2007, and to evaluate the potential disharmony of norms between the TPPO regulation and the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE) regarding the regulation of digital evidence. The research method employed is normative legal research with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The results indicate that, dogmatically, the elements of TPPO—comprising the process of virtual recruitment, the means of fraudulent job promises, and the purpose of digital forced labor exploitation—under Law No. 21 of 2007 remain relevant for prosecuting cyber-recruitment perpetrators, although it demands a broader legal interpretation of cyberspace realities. However, legal certainty issues were found due to the lack of synchronicity in the regulation of digital evidence, where differences in procedures and qualifications exist between electronic evidence in the TPPO Law and the evidentiary standards in the UU ITE, which are volatile in nature. The implications of this research conclude the need for regulatory synchronization through the establishment of technical guidelines for handling TPPO-specific electronic evidence to provide a solid legal foundation for law enforcement agencies. This step is crucial to overcome cross-border jurisdictional obstacles and to ensure substantive justice and comprehensive protection of victims' rights in the digital era.

The principle of the presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle in criminal law that aims to protect the rights of suspects from the beginning of the legal process. This principle is enshrined in the 1945 Constitution and regulated in Article 8 of Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), which states that a person cannot be considered guilty unless a court decision with permanent legal force declares them guilty. The application of this principle at every stage of examination (investigation, prosecution, and trial) is crucial to ensuring the protection of the rights of perpetrators (suspects or defendants) and preventing the abuse of power that may harm individuals who have not been proven guilty. This research focuses on examining the consequences of violations of this principle in investigations and the protection of suspects’ rights within the criminal justice system, along with efforts to prevent such violations. The method used is a literature review with a juridical-normative approach. The findings indicate frequent neglect of the presumption of innocence, leading to human rights violations. To prevent this, stricter supervision by external monitoring bodies, such as the National Commission on Human Rights, is necessary to safeguard the rights of suspects.

The Juvenile Criminal Justice System (SPPA) in Indonesia is a manifestation of special protection for children in conflict with the law, prioritizing the principles of restorative justice and diversion. This study aims to analyze the implementation of the SPPA based on Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System and to identify the legal challenges that arise in its practice. The research method used is normative legal with a legislative and conceptual approach. The results of the study show that although the regulations mandate diversion efforts as a top priority in resolving juvenile cases, there are still obstacles in its implementation, both in terms of the readiness of law enforcement officials, limited supporting facilities, and the perception of the community, which still tends to expect a retributive (punitive) approach. In addition, the protection of children's rights during the judicial process is often not optimally fulfilled. This analysis concludes that strengthening inter-agency coordination and increasing law enforcement officials' understanding of restorative justice are key to the effectiveness of this system. Further regulatory harmonization and strengthening the role of the Correctional Center in overseeing the diversion process are needed to ensure that the best interests of the child remain the top priority at every stage of the judicial process

This study examines the urgency of regulating the nominal limit of restitution in criminal case resolution through a restorative justice approach from the perspective of legal certainty. Restorative justice in Indonesia is governed by PERKAP No. 8 of 2021, PERJA No. 15 of 2020, and PERMA No. 1 of 2024. However, none of these regulations explicitly stipulate the nominal limit of compensation payable to victims. The absence of such a provision potentially leads to legal uncertainty and unfair practices, particularly in cases where resolution depends on the offender's ability to pay restitution. This research adopts a normative juridical method using statutory and conceptual approaches. The study aims to analyze the necessity of regulating nominal limits and how such limits should be determined under the prevailing legal framework. The findings reveal that the lack of clear restitution limits hampers the effective implementation of restorative justice, undermines fairness, and fails to adequately protect victims' rights. Legal regulation of compensation limits is necessary to ensure legal certainty, prevent abuse of power, and uphold justice in the victim recovery process. The study recommends that the state promptly establish clear restitution limits through revision of existing regulations or formulation of new ones, taking into account the principles of justice, the offender’s financial capacity, and the proportionality of the victim's losses.

Corruption cases in Indonesia often involve the recovery of state assets, including properties encumbered by mortgages (hak tanggungan). This research conducts a normative legal analysis on how current law treats such pledged assets when they become objects of state confiscation in corruption crimes. We examine Indonesian legislation (especially the Tipikor Act, TPPU Act, and Mortgage Act), judicial practice, and principles of justice and legal certainty. The Bank Perumda BPR Purworejo case is used as an illustrative case study: here fictitious loans and misused collateral led to state losses of hundreds of millions of rupiah, and investigators seized assets (including four mortgaged properties) as evidence. The analysis finds that existing rules inadequately protect good-faith creditors: courts have noted that a corruption verdict does not automatically erase a prior mortgage lien, and that a certified mortgage confers a preferential right equal to a judgment. In practice, however, law enforcement often seizes all assets of the convict without first verifying third-party rights, creating legal uncertainty and perceived injustice. We argue that fair outcomes require stricter safeguards for creditors (e.g. mandatory review of collateral status before seizure) and consideration of equitable principles. In conclusion, we recommend legal reforms or guidelines to balance the state’s recovery goals with protection of bona fide mortgagees, so as to uphold substantive justice while maintaining legal certainty.

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.

Criminal acts of assault against children constitute a serious violation of human rights that requires optimal legal protection by the state. As legal subjects, children are entitled to security, protection from violence, and guarantees for proper growth and development, as mandated by Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, and relevant child protection legislation. This study aims to conduct a juridical analysis of the legal considerations applied by judges in Decision Number 83/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Kot concerning the criminal offense of assault committed against a child, as well as to assess their conformity with criminal law principles, child protection law, and the objectives of sentencing. This research employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, supported by primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings reveal that although the legal basis applied refers to Law Number 35 of 2014 on Child Protection, the judicial considerations have not been comprehensively formulated, as they insufficiently incorporate sociological, criminological, and child-centered protection perspectives. Consequently, the sentence imposed is relatively lenient and fails to fully reflect the objectives of punishment, particularly deterrence and sustainable protection for child victims. Therefore, strengthening the quality of judicial reasoning and ensuring the optimal application of relevant legal provisions are essential to achieve legal certainty, justice, and effective protection for children as victims of violent crimes.

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.

This study examines legal protection for victims of criminal offenses from a victimological perspective, emphasizing the position, rights, and needs of victims within the criminal justice system. Victimology, as a scientific discipline, highlights that victims are not merely objects of crime but subjects who are entitled to protection, restoration, and justice. This research employs a normative juridical method supported by a conceptual and statutory approach to analyze existing legal frameworks governing victim protection. The findings indicate that although legal instruments have provided various forms of protection such as restitution, compensation, and psychological assistance their implementation remains suboptimal due to institutional limitations, lack of awareness, and procedural constraints. From a victimological standpoint, effective protection requires a balanced approach between offender accountability and victim recovery, including recognition of victims' rights, access to justice, and comprehensive rehabilitation. Therefore, strengthening regulations, improving institutional coordination, and adopting a more victim oriented justice system are essential to ensure optimal legal protection for victims of criminal acts.