Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM Justitia et Pax INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL, POLICY AND LAW (IJOSPL)
Elisabeth Sundari
Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta
Humanities Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Legal Aid Scheme In Indonesia: Between The Policy And The Implementation Elisabeth Sundari
Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM Vol. 20 No. 4: Oktober 2013
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20885/iustum.vol20.iss4.art3

Abstract

In the legal policy level, the government of Indonesia has already had the policies to assist the justice seekers who are financially weak to have an access to justice through court. There are two research problems in this matter. First, does the policy on the legal assistance as stipulated in Law Number 16 of 2011 work optimally for the justice seekers who are financially weak? Second, how is the implementation of the policy on the legal assistance in the practices? The normative research was conducted to answer those two questions, through document data such as Law No.48 of 2009 on The Principles of Justice Power, Law No. 8 of 2003 on Advocate, and Law No. 16 of 2011 on Legal Assistance, and the implementation of those regulations in the practices in several places. The conclusion obtained from the research is: First, it is not yet optimum since the policy especially in terms of budget allocation of the legal assistance is still low. The professional lawyers tend to avoid their obligation to free give legal assistance to the poor. Second, in practice, the legal assistance is not yet enjoyed by the poor justice seekers. The economic and good will are the influencing factors.
THE WEAKNESS OF THE CONTROL SYSTEM FOR FIGHTING CORRUPTION IN THE JUDICIAL PROCESS: THE CASE OF INDONESIA Elisabeth Sundari; Anny Retnowati
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL, POLICY AND LAW Vol. 2 No. 1 (2021): February 2021
Publisher : INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL, POLICY AND LAW

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.8888/ijospl.v2i1.35

Abstract

Several supervisory bodies have been established under government policy in Indonesia to prevent and eradicate corruption within the judicial process. However, these appear to be ineffective, as evidenced by the fact that corruption by judges, prosecutors, and court officials remain high [11, 12, 19, 20]. The purpose of this research is explaining the weaknesses of the control model in fighting corruption within the judicial process and its factors. Normative research has been conducted on the legal policies affecting the control system of the judicial process in Indonesia to redress the issue. The results show that from the quantitative perspective, adequate supervisory bodies have been established to deal with corruption. For instance, there is an internal supervisory body for each institution in the judicial process, together with external supervisory bodies such as the Judicial Commission, Corruption Eradication Commission, and Examination Commission. Nevertheless, from the qualitative perspective, many weaknesses remain. Firstly, government policy focuses on the model for internal supervisory bodies rather than external. Secondly, although external supervisory bodies are established, they have no broader authority, except the Corruption Eradication Commission. Thirdly, external control through community participation has limited jurisdiction. Finally, the punishment enforcement system is ineffective
PERKEMBANGAN PEMBUKTIAN PADA PUTUSAN VERSTEK: STUDI KASUS DI PENGADILAN NEGERI SLEMAN DAN KOTA YOGYAKARTA Elisabeth Sundari; Nindry Sulistya Widiastiani
Justitia et Pax Vol. 35 No. 2 (2019): Justitia et Pax Volume 35 Nomor 2 Tahun 2019
Publisher : Penerbit Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24002/jep.v35i2.2936

Abstract

Article 25 of HIR provides that in case the defendant does not appear at court process (verstek), the claim will be accepted unless it is unreasonable and against the rights. In the beginning, that article was interpreted that in case the defendant doesn’t  appear at court process (verstek), the plaintiff shall not obeyed to proof his claim. How is the development of that previous interpretation? Normative legal research has been conducted to redress that issue. The data were collected from secondary data resources from Sleman and Yogyakarta District Court decisions concerning the burden of proof  in verstek recently,  and being  analized  qualitatively. The research result shows that there is a development in  interpretating Article 125 HIR, where the judges burdened the plaintiff to proof his claim. That interpretation development supports the strive to get the truth beyond reasonable doubt, to meet a fair decision,  as good as to avoid fraud claim, and haphazard decision.
Co-Authors Anny Retnowati Nindry Sulistya Widiastiani