Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL MERCATORIA Iuris Studia: Jurnal Kajian Hukum
Putri Rumondang Siagian
Universitas Sumatera Utara
Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Tinjauan Yuridis Tentang Larangan Pengajuan Praperadilan Oleh Orang Yang Berstatus Daftar Pencarian Orang (DPO) Putri Rumondang Siagian; Syafruddin Kalo; Edi Yunara; Muhammad Hamdan
Iuris Studia: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Vol 2, No 3 (2021): Oktober 2021 - Januari 2022
Publisher : Iuris Studia: Jurnal Kajian Hukum

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55357/is.v2i3.177

Abstract

This thesis is motivated by the principle of the rule of law which guarantees human rights to form the concept of pre-trial. Pre-trial in principle aims to carry out horizontal oversight of all acts of forced effort by law enforcers in the interests of criminal cases so that these actions do not conflict with legal and statutory regulations in addition to internal supervision within the apparatus itself. La Nyalla's pre-trial request as a suspect who fled or are in the status of a list of people search (DPO) status was learned that even though he was a DPO, La Nyalla won a pre-trial lawsuit which was stated through Court Decision Number: 19 / Pra.Per / 2016 / PN.Sby. After the pre-trial decision filed by the DPO suspect, the Supreme Court issued a Circular of the Supreme Court (SEMA) No. 1 of 2018 on March 23, 2018, discusses the prohibition on pre-trial submissions for suspects who have fled or are on the status of a search list (DPO). But the rules of SEMA No. 1 of 2018 seems to be deviated from the granting of pre-trial requests from suspects with DPO status through Court Decision Number 23 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN Pbr and Court Decision No.8 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN. Plw. Determination of DPO is a consequence of suspects who do not attend to the investigator's summons as stated in Article 112 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code after proper calling is carried out in accordance with procedural rules. If viewed from Article 79 of the Criminal Procedure Code which regulates the submission of pre-trial, there is a limitation of the right of the suspect to file a pre-trial application for the suspect himself. The problem in this study is how are the pre-trial arrangements in the Criminal Procedure Code and the Criminal Procedure Code? how is the position of SEMA No. 1 of 2018 in legislation? How is the position of the suspect who is a DPO in filing a pre-trial application? This study uses theory. The method used in this study is a normative legal research and  descriptive analytical. This study uses secondary data sources. This secondary data uses 3 (three) sources of data, namely primary legal material, secondary legal material, tertiary legal material. This data collection method is obtained from the library research. Data collection tool is done by studying documents. Analysis using the qualitative method then emphasizes the deductive method. The results of this study indicate that the KUHAP and RKUHAP through the commissioners' judges have given the suspect and the related parties the right to make horizontal supervision efforts on the actions of the investigator. SEMA is not authorized to prohibit citizens' rights. The position of SEMA No.1 Year 2018 is part of the legislation which is the nature of policy rules by binding to Supreme Court agencies as regulators Court Decision Number 23 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN Pbr and Decision No.8 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN. Plw became a breakthrough for pre-trial single judges in providing justice to suspects with DPO status for filing pre-trial
Pertanggungjawaban Hukum Bedah Plastik Estetik yang Merubah Fitur Wajah Tengku Keizerina Devi Azwar; Arya Tjipta Prananda; Eva Syahfitri Nasution; Putri Rumondang Siagian; Hilbertus Sumplisius M. Wau; Utary Maharany Barus
JURNAL MERCATORIA Vol. 16 No. 1 (2023): JURNAL MERCATORIA JUNI
Publisher : Universitas Medan Area

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31289/mercatoria.v16i1.8433

Abstract

Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pertanggungjawaban hukum dalam bedah plastik estetik yang mengubah fitur wajah, mengingat kemajuan teknologi alat kedokteran dan ketidakpuasan seseorang terhadap wajahnya yang diberikan oleh Tuhan Yang Maha Esa. Penelitian dilakukan dengan sudut pandang penerapan Undang-undang Nomor 36 Tahun 2009 tentang Kesehatan. Dokter yang melakukan pembedahan plastik sering kali melakukan kesalahan, baik sengaja maupun lalai hingga menimbulkan korban. Oleh karenanya, dokter tidak akan terlepas dari jeratan hukum maupun sanksi akibat tindakannya. Fokus masalahnya tentang pengaturan bedah plastik estetik di Indonesia dan tanggung jawab hukum dokter dalam melakukan bedah plastik estetik yang mengubah fitur wajah. Kajian ini menggunakan penelitian yuridis normatif dengan metode pendekatan perundang-undangan, teknik pengumpulan data melalui studi kepustakaan yang dianalisis secara kualitatif. Hasil kajian menyimpulkan bahwa hubungan antara dokter dan pasien terjadi karena adanya perjanjian timbal balik yang menimbulkan hak dan kewajiban. Dokter berjanji untuk merubah atau menyempurnakan bagian tertentu dari pasien pada bagian wajah, sedangkan pasien berjanji untuk membayar biaya pengobatan, perawatan, dan pembedahannya. Jika salah satu pihak tidak memenuhi atau melanggar perjanjian tersebut, maka pasien dapat menuntut dokter berdasarkan Pasal 1239 KUHPerdata. Selain itu, masing-masing pihak yang dirugikan dapat menuntut dengan gugatan berdasarkan wanprestasi.
Co-Authors Edi Yunara Eva Syahfitri Nasution, Eva Syahfitri Hilbertus Sumplisius M. Wau Muhammad Hamdan Syafruddin Kalo Tengku Keizerina Devi Azwar Tjipta, Arya Utary Maharany Barus