Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Pro Hukum : Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik Multidisciplinary Journal of Education, Economic and Culture Parlementer : Jurnal Studi Hukum Dan Administrasi Publik
Nardiman Nardiman
Universitas Esa Unggul
Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Tinjauan Yuridis dalam Perkara Pidana Money Laundering Randi Fryandika; Markoni Markoni; Nardiman Nardiman; Joko Widarto
Jurnal Pro Hukum : Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik Vol 12 No 3 (2023): Jurnal Pro Hukum : Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gresik

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

Abstract

Undang-undang Nomor 8 tahun 2010 tentang Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang (TPPU) merupakan salah satu pedoman penting bagi penegakkan hukum atas TPPU. Namun, Undang-undang ini mendapat sorotan terutama Pasal 69 terkait diadili secara bersamaan atau tidaknya tindak pidana asal sebelum terjadinya TPPU sehingga membuat Undang-undang ini patut dipertanyakan kepastian dan keadilan hukumnya. Di sisi lain, pada praktiknya masih terdapat putusan hakim yang mengedepankan teori kepastian hukum dengan memastikan pelaku diadili sesuai dengan peraturan yang berlaku atas setiap perbuatannya baik itu TPPU maupun tindak pidana asalnya, salah satunya Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Bekasi Nomor 741/Pid.B//2014/PN.Bks. Hakim pada putusan ini juga mengedepankan teori keadilan hukum dengan mendakwa pelaku sesuai dengan setiap perbuatannya yang mengarah pada pelanggaran terhadap hukum pidana seperti menyalahgunakan jabatan dan korupsi. Pada kasus ini, hakim sangat mengedepankan prinsip efisiensi dalam peradilan dengan tetap dibuktikannya tindak pidana asal dalam proses peradilan TPPU. Bagaimanapun, demi efektivitas penegakkan terhadap hukum TPPU dan demi menghindari terjadinya perbedaan putusan pengadilan, sebaiknya TPPU digabung dengan tindak pidana asalnya. Selain yang demikian menjamin prinsip speed administration dan efisiensi peradilan, juga lebih memberi kepastian dan perlindungan hak asasi terhadap subjek hukum yang diduga melakukan TPPU maupun pihak yang menjadi korban atas TPPU.
Pertimbangan Hakim Dalam Menjatuhkan Vonis Terhadap Lansia Demensia Yang Melakukan Perbuatan Tindak Pidana Hendry Fand Tia; Helvis Helvis; I Made Khantika; Nardiman Nardiman
Multidisciplinary Journal of Education , Economic and Culture Vol. 2 No. 1 (2024): March 2024
Publisher : Yayasan Pondok Pesantren Sunan Bonang Tuban

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61231/mjeec.v2i1.212

Abstract

Child molestation is a despicable act that is not only committed by any adults, but also elderly people who may suffer from dementia that may be at cronic stage. Criminal liability for elderly people with dementia has to be medically observed or medical forensic observation by certified mental health doctors. If a psychiatric expert states that the defendant suffer from a severe mental health that may be exampted by the law, then the defendant has the potential to be waved from penal punishment. The aim of this research is to determine the judge's considerations in giving sentences to defendants who is an elderly with cronic dementia. This research uses a normative juridical research method. The results of his research showed that elderly people with dementia were still found guilty because they were proven to have committed a criminal act, in their consideration the judge took into account aggravating and mitigating factors so that in their decision the judge sentenced the defendant to serve his sentence not in prison but sent him to a mental hospital. to be treated. In conclusion, the judge still sentenced the defendant because the judge believed that the defendant committed his actions before experiencing dementia, so the Panel of Judges at the South Jakarta District Court sentenced the defendant to 6 (six) months in prison and a fine of Rp. 20,000,000.00 (twenty million rupiah), and pay restitution in the amount of Rp. 38,736,550 (thirty-eight million seven hundred thirty-six thousand five hundred and fifty rupiah).
Kedudukan Hukum Justice Collaborator dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia Aditya Redaya; Helvis Helvis; I Made Kantikha; Nardiman Nardiman
Parlementer : Jurnal Studi Hukum dan Administrasi Publik Vol. 1 No. 3 (2024): September: Parlementer: Jurnal Studi Hukum dan Administrasi Publik
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/parlementer.v1i3.56

Abstract

Justice collaborators play an important role in law enforcement. The role or function of a justice collaborator includes disclosing a criminal act or the impending occurrence of a criminal act, so that the return of assets resulting from criminal acts can be achieved to the state, providing information to law enforcement officials, providing testimony in the judicial process. The aim of this research is to analyze the legal position of justice collaborators in the criminal justice legal system in Indonesia. This research uses a type of normative juridical research by analyzing primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. The results of the research are that the legal position of justice collaborator has a very important role in uncovering a well-organized criminal act, or a particular criminal case, so that the suspect or defendant's request to become a justice collaborator must be granted. considered based on the evidence at trial in this case. It is within the judge's authority to grant the justice collaborator's request, because this will affect the sentence. In conclusion, justice collaborators are not regulated in the criminal procedural law book in Indonesia, but are regulated in Law Number 31 of 2014 concerning Protection of Witnesses and Victims, as well as Joint Regulations for Law Enforcement Officials and Witness and Victim Protection Institutions concerning Protection of Witnesses and Victims. Complainant, Reporting Witness and Perpetrator Witness Working Together.
Co-Authors Aditya Redaya Helvis Helvis Hendry Fand Tia I Made Kantikha I Made Khantika Joko Widarto Markoni Markoni Randi Fryandika