Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

Juridical Overview of Land Dispute Settlement Misbakhul Munir; Azis Budianto; Rineke Sara
Edunity Kajian Ilmu Sosial dan Pendidikan Vol. 2 No. 1 (2023): Edunity : Social and Educational Studies
Publisher : Publikasiku

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (64.855 KB) | DOI: 10.57096/edunity.v1i05.46

Abstract

Along with the times, the way people view land slowly began to change. In the past, land was only considered a supporting factor for agricultural activities, but now it has been seen from a more strategic perspective, namely as an important asset in the world of industry and human life. Now a lot of lands has been used not only as a place for agricultural activities but also for industrial activities, including being used as an integrated residential complex such as housing which has recently mushroomed everywhere. Settlement of land dispute cases as regulated in Law Number 51 of 1960, in article 2 and article 6 paragraph (1) letter a, that the use of land without permission from those who are entitled or their legal proxies is a prohibited act and is threatened with criminal penalties. However, in responding to conflicts and land disputes that arise, one must look at it from several points of view while still prioritizing justice and not harming both parties, so it is not only seen from the side of the occupation, but also in terms of the utilization and use of the land by the community owner if in terms of utilization the land is not utilized optimally and even seems to have been neglected by the owner for approximately 15 years. Settlement of disputes through deliberation with mediation is taken as a path to resolving land problems, considering that the main purpose of mediation is to resolve problems, not just applying norms or creating order, but its implementation must also be based on general principles.
Law Enforcement Against The Criminal Act of Forgery of Documents By a Notary In The Perspective of Law No. 30 of 2004 Concerning The Implementation of Administrative Sanctions or The Notary's Code of Ethics Rineke Sara; Theresia Trisnaning
Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains Vol. 4 No. 12 (2023): Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains
Publisher : CV. Publikasi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59141/jiss.v4i12.933

Abstract

The existence of a notary as a witness or even as a suspect, if it is related to the existence of his position in the legal field which is intended to support the smooth running of a law enforcement process, including the judicial process, would not be a problem, in other words, it is only natural for a notary to act as a witness or even as a suspect in a judicial process. On the other hand, a notary in carrying out his position as a public official, apart from being related to a position regulation, is also related to the oath of office which he takes when appointed as a notary where the notary is obliged to keep the contents of the deed and information he obtains confidential as regulated in Article 4 Paragraph ( 2) Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary which states that, I will keep confidential the contents of deeds and information obtained in the performance of my office. Further Article 54 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Amendments to the Law -Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary Public explains that a notary can only give, show, or notify the contents of the deed, grosses deed, copy of the deed or excerpt from the deed, to people who have a direct interest in the deed, heirs, or people who have acquired rights, unless otherwise determined by statutory regulations. The exercise of the right to keep secrets related to one's position is also regulated in criminal procedural law, civil law, and the Criminal Code. Article 170 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code states that those who because of their work, dignity, or position are required to keep secrets, can ask to be released from exercising their right to provide information as a witness, namely about matters entrusted to them. This type of research is Normative research. The approaches used are a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The data source used is secondary data. Data analysis was carried out descriptively and qualitatively. Concluding is carried out using a deductive method from general to specific, especially those related to the research topic, namely law enforcement against the crime of document falsification by notaries in the perspective of Law no. 30 of 2004. This research resulted in the findings of Law Number 30 of 2004 in conjunction with Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Position of Notaries which regulates that when a Notary in carrying out his official duties has committed a violation that causes a deviation from the law, the Notary can be subject to sanctions in the form of sanctions. Civil, Administrative, Code of Ethics for Notary Positions. These sanctions have been regulated in such a way both previously and now in the Law on the Position of Notaries regarding the Code of Ethics for the Notary Position profession where there is no description of criminal sanctions but rather the organization of the Notary Supervisory Council which has the authority to impose punishments on notaries. Notaries in carrying out their official duties do not close the possibility of being in contact with legal issues, even though carrying out the duties has been done carefully and by statutory provisions
Environmental Issues And Environmental Law Enforcement In Indonesia In The Perspective Of Law Number 32 Of 2009 Rineke Sara; Bastoni Purnama
Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains Vol. 5 No. 01 (2024): Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains
Publisher : CV. Publikasi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59141/jiss.v5i1.936

Abstract

The rise of increasingly serious environmental cases, one of which is related to problems in the forestry sector, has prompted the birth of Law Number 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management (UU PPLH). In this research, the approach used is Juridical-Normative, with a dogmatic type of research, a descriptive research form of legal relations. This research is limited to descriptive-analytical research on criminal policies in environmental law enforcement. The source of all environmental problems is development carried out without paying attention to environmental balance factors which in turn will cause environmental damage and pollution. Legal action taken against perpetrators of environmental pollution and destruction consists of administrative aspects, civil aspects, and criminal aspects. Law enforcement itself needs to be supported by several factors, namely legal means, law enforcement officers, facilities and infrastructure, permits, the Amdal system, and public legal awareness of the environment
Accountability Of The Indonesian National Army Member Who Commited Corruption Crime On The Housing Obligatory Savings For Army 2020 Rineke Sara; Yanwiyatono Prastyanto
Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains Vol. 5 No. 01 (2024): Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains
Publisher : CV. Publikasi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59141/jiss.v5i1.944

Abstract

Corruption is not only carried out by civil society, TNI members who have undergone disciplinary training can also be engaged in committing corruption, specifically undertook by Brigadier General TNI Yus Adi Kamrullah, S.E., M.Si. and Ni Putu Purnamasari who is a TNI member in the case of TNI-AD housing savings corruption in 2019-2020. The problem of this research is how to account for TNI members who engage in corrupting crimes in the 2020 Army Housing Compulsory Savings (TWP AD). The research method used is a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The type of research used is normative, with primary, secondary and tertiary legitimate provisions. From the outcomes, it was concluded that the criminal responsibility of the perpetrator in this case was sentenced to defendant 1: Brigadier General TNI (ret.) Yus Adi Kamrullah, S.E., M.Si. Defendant-2: Ni Putu Purmasari has been legitimately and conclusively proven jointly and continuously to have committed the corruption crime. Sentencing the defendants to basic and additional crimes