Narcotics abuse is a serious problem that threatens the security and welfare of society. This thesis aims to carry out a juridical analysis of the decision of the Mojokerto District Court Number 509/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Mjk, which handles narcotics abuse cases, with a focus on the Narcotics Law. This thesis examines how the decision provides justice to victims of narcotics abuse in Mojokerto. The analysis involves legal interpretation, legal considerations, and the impact of applying the article on the victim. Apart from that, this thesis also discusses the extent to which this decision can contribute to efforts to prevent narcotics abuse in society.The research method used is an empirical method with document analysis, which includes a study of Mojokerto District Court decisions, laws and related literature. The results of an in-depth analysis of the decision show an understanding of the rights and legal protection for victims of narcotics abuse, especially by detailing aspects related to Articles 112 and 114 of the Narcotics Law.The results of this research are as follows (1). The basis for the judge's decision is case Number 509/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Mjk which is articles 112 and 114 of the Narcotics Law. Where the judge decided on a criminal sentence of 9 years (2). The decision given by the judge was correct, based on articles 112 and 114 of the Narcotics Law. Namely a prison sentence of 9 years.  Articles 112 and 114 regulate criminal sanctions for narcotics abusers.

Marriage is a sacred agreement in human life, although some marriages also fail and end in divorce. However, this divorce does not only stop at the end of the relationship between the two parties. But more than that, the problem of separation of joint property also often becomes a new problem after divorce. This study then aimed to review the implementation of divorce and division of property arising from marriage according to Law Number 16 of 2019 concerning Amendments to Law Number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage. The research method used is normative, with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The results of the study showed that the legal basis for joint property is contained in Chapter VII Article 35 to Article 37 of Law Number 16 of 2019 concerning Amendments to Law Number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage. Based on this law, the path to division of joint property is divided through several mechanisms, namely based on religious law, based on customary law, and based on other laws. Compared to Law Number 1 of 1974, Law Number 16 of 2019 provides more detailed and modern regulations regarding joint property compared to previous provisions. Overall, according to Law Number 16 of 2019, the authority to settle the division of joint property arising from marriage involves the court in deciding fairly based on applicable law. The court has the responsibility to ensure that the division of property is carried out with the principle of justice, taking into account the contribution of each party and their needs and economic circumstances. In the case of mediation or agreements outside the court, the court still has the authority to assess and ensure that the decisions taken are in accordance with applicable legal provisions.
 

The Industrial Revolution 4.0 has drastically transformed global industries, introducing advanced technologies such as automation, artificial intelligence, and digitalization into the workplace. This rapid technological shift has presented significant challenges for labor laws, which are often designed for traditional work environments. This study explores the implementation of labor law in the context of the Industrial Revolution 4.0, analyzing the challenges faced by both employers and employees in adapting to these new technological advancements. Using a qualitative methodology, this research employs a juridical review of existing labor laws, supported by an in-depth case study examining how these laws are applied in technology-driven industries. The findings indicate that labor laws often lag behind the technological advances, leading to gaps in legal protections for workers and ambiguities in employer obligations. The case study highlights specific instances where current labor regulations fail to address issues related to remote work, job displacement due to automation, and workers' rights in the gig economy. Solutions are proposed to modernize labor laws, ensuring they are adaptable to future technological developments while safeguarding workers' rights. The study concludes that there is an urgent need for legal reforms to balance innovation with fair labor practices in the era of Industry 4.0.