Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Online Mahasiswa (JOM) Bidang Ilmu Hukum Panji Keadilan : Jurnal Ilmiah Nasional Mahasiswa Hukum
Nova Ariati
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
PERANAN JAKSA PENUNTUT UMUM DALAM PENYELESAIAN PERKARA MONEY LAUNDERING PADA KASUS NOMOR 646/PIDANA/B/2013/PENGADILAN NEGERI PEKANBARU Ariati, Nova; Effendi, Erdianto; Indra, Mexsasai
Jurnal Online Mahasiswa (JOM) Bidang Ilmu Hukum Vol 2, No 1 (2015): Wisuda Februari 2015
Publisher : Jurnal Online Mahasiswa (JOM) Bidang Ilmu Hukum

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Based on watchfulness result and discussion, money loundering in case Nomor 646/Pidana/B/2013/Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru, from facts revealed at conference have been known that any element in third accusation more subsidair fulfilled, break section 3 law Nomor 8 year 2010, paragraph 372 KUHP and paragraph 378 KUHP. In case apply elements decision Nomor 646/Pidana/B/2013/Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru, judge of district court Pekanbaru appropriate apply elements in third accusation more subsidair from public prosecutor, the elements:a. Everyoneb. Get or dominate location, transfer, payment, gift, contribution, entrusted, exchange or use wealth treasure detect it or fitting detectt it be doing an injustice result.c. As one who does, order to do or join in to dod. Several deeds connecteds, so that thereby must be looked at as one deed sustaiined.Base judge deliberation in drop criminal in case Nomor 646/Pidana/B/2013/Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru, in drop criminal decision,considering base fallen down thecriminal, that is with base in valid proof tools, proved at conference that cover witnesses explanation, proof goods, and explanation defendants delf.Towards valid proof tools that subbimeted in conference, and reviewed from conformity between proof tools one by means of ohter proof, with consodering verification value each proof. All juridical fact rvealed at conference appropriate and proved the true fulfil elements in third accusation more subsidair.Keywords : Role-Prosecutor – Money Loundering
KEBIJAKAN PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP ANAK SEBAGAI KORBAN KEJAHATAN DALAM HUKUM POSITIF DI INDONESIA Ariati, Nova
Jurnal Panji Keadilan : Jurnal Ilmiah Nasional Mahasiswa Hukum Vol 2, No 2 (2019): PANJI KEADILAN Jurnal Ilmiah Nasional Mahasiswa Hukum
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Bengkulu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36085/jpk.v2i2.1177

Abstract

ABSTRAKSidang praperadilan dilakukan dengan cepat dan berita acara serta putusan praperadilan dibuat seperti pemeriksaan singkat dan dipimpin oleh seorang hakim tunggal. Tujuh hari merupakan ketentuan yang diamanatkan KUHAP untuk pelaksanaan rangkaian praperadilan yang cepat dan sederhana, mulai dari pemeriksaan perkara. Mahkamah Konstitusi melalui putusan nomor 78 / PUU-XI / 2013 menegaskan bahwa proses praperadilan paling lambat tujuh hari untuk memberikan kepastian hukum, terutama bagi pemohon yang merasa haknya dirugikan. Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis empiris yaitu sebagai upaya pendekatan masalah yang diteliti dengan sifat hukum yang nyata atau sesuai dengan kenyataan dilapangan, karena dalam penelitian ini peneliti segera melakukan penelitian di lokasi atau lapangan penelitian yaitu tempat yang diteliti untuk memberikan gambaran yang lengkap dan jelas tentang masalah yang diteliti. Sifat penelitian ini adalah deskriptif. Penelitian ini menggunakan data sekunder yaitu data yang telah disiapkan. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah interpretasi hakim terkait sidang praperadilan selama tujuh hari antara hari kerja dan hari kalender dalam beberapa kasus dan relevansinya dengan kode etik hakim di Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru yang bervariasi. Hal ini karena masih adanya penafsiran hakim yang tidak sesuai dengan ketentuan KUHAP sehingga masih ada hakim yang memutuskan perkara praperadilan melebihi 7 hari kerja. Pemenuhan hak pemohon dengan interpretasi terkait sidang praperadilan tujuh hari antara hari kerja dan hari kalender di Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru masih memuat beberapa perkara yang menunjukkan terpenuhinya hak pemohon sesuai dengan ketentuan di dalam KUHAP. Dalam Pasal 82 ayat (1) huruf c KUHAP paling lambat tujuh hari hakim harus sudah mengambil putusan, padahal masih ada beberapa perkara yang putusan hakimnya dijatuhkan lebih dari 7 hari. Kata kunci: interpretasi; uji coba tujuh hari; praperadilanABSTRACTThe pretrial hearing is conducted quickly and the minutes and pretrial decisions are made like a brief examination and are chaired by a single judge. Seven days is a provision mandated by the Criminal Procedure Code for the implementation of a quick and simple pre-trial series, starting from the commencement of the examination. The Constitutional Court through decision number 78 / PUU-XI / 2013 asserted that at the latest seven days the pretrial process is to provide legal certainty, especially for applicants who feel their rights are harmed. This type of research is empirical juridical research that is as an effort to approach the problem under study with the nature of law that is real or in accordance with the reality in the field, because in this study, researchers immediately conduct research on the location or place under study to provide a complete and clear picture about the problem under study. The nature of this research is descriptive. This study uses secondary data, namely data that has been prepared. The results of this study are the interpretation of judges related to the seven-day pretrial hearing between workdays and calendar days in some cases and their relevance to the judge's code of ethics in the Pekanbaru District Court varies. There are still interpretations of judges who are not in accordance with the provisions of the KUHAP so that there are still judges who decide that pretrial cases exceed 7 working days. Fulfillment of the right of the applicant with a related interpretation of the seven-day pretrial hearing between the working day and calendar day in the Pekanbaru District Court still contains several cases that indicate the fulfillment of the right of the applicant in accordance with the provisions in the Criminal Procedure Code. In Article 82 paragraph (1) letter c KUHAP no later than seven days the judge must have made a decision, while there are still a number of cases where the judge's decision is imposed more than 7 days.Keywords: interpretation; seven days trial; pretrial
Co-Authors Erdianto Effendi Mexsasai Indra