The phenomenon of "vigilante" is still a serious problem in various regions, including Pangkalan Jati Village. This extrajudicial action not only violates social norms, but also has the potential to threaten public order and security. This study aims to analyze the phenomenon of "vigilante" in Pangkalan Jati Village, as well as its impact on environmental security. The method used is a case study with a qualitative approach through in-depth interviews with community leaders, village officials, and victims/perpetrators of "vigilante" actions. The results of the study indicate that factors such as weak law enforcement, public distrust of the authorities, and lack of legal awareness are the main triggers for these actions. The impacts include increasing rates of violence, social divisions, and security instability. As an effort to overcome this problem, legal socialization has been carried out to the community as part of community service activities. This socialization is expected to increase public legal awareness, strengthen trust in the authorities, and encourage the community to resolve problems legally. This study concludes that legal socialization is an important step in preventing "vigilante" actions and creating a safe and conducive environment.

This research aims to determine the relevance of the principle of judicial independence in deciding or considering the judge's verdict on the defendant in criminal cases under trial. It also aims to identify the legal basis that judge used in delivering the verdict. This study used a normative research method, from various legal principles, legal systems, and statutory regulations. The specific case under investigation involved an issue of injustice that occurred during the trial, where the judge granted leniency to the defendant based on their courteous behavior during the trial. The focus of this research is on aspects that may be considered for leniency by the judge, one of which is the defendant's polite behavior during the trial. Polite behavior is not explicitly regulated in criminal law, making it necessary to further investigate the judge's considerations in granting leniency to defendants who behave politely during the trial. This research is based on Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning the judiciary.

Tulisan ini membahas tentang subtansi dari Pasal 69 undang-undang nomor 8 tahun 2010 tentang tentang Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang (PPTPPU). Permasalahan yang terjadi dalam tataran penegakan hukum di lapangan adalah bahwa pasal 69 ditafsirkan oleh sebahagian penegak hukum sebagai pasal yang memberikan ruang kebebasan untuk tidak melakukan pembuktian pidana asal. Tentu tafsir ini membawa implikasi hukum yang tidak sederhana karena menyangkut asas praduga tak bersalah dan konsepsi pembuktian dalam sistem pradilan pidana di Indonesia. Tujuan dari penulisan ini adalah memberikan pandangan tentang maksud pasal 69 tersebut dimana kemudian pasal tersebut dinyatakan konstitusional oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Metode penelitian yang digunakan oleh penulis adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan analitis terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan, putusan mahkamah konstitusi dan putusan pengadilan serta pendekatan kasuistis atas beberapa praktek penegakan hukum di lapangan. Tulisan ini menghasilkan kesimpulan bahwa pembuktian tindak pidana asal tetap harus dilakukan agar proses penegakan hukum tetap berjalan jujur, adil, dan independen (due process of law ).