Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2019 - 2024
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Justisi : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum
Yuniar Rahmatiar
Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Buana Perjuangan Karawang
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
CURRENT CONDITIONS FOR THE PROVIDENT OF CIVIL MEASURES CONTRA DROGS CONTRACTING CLASS I PARTIELLE ON THE BASIS OF LEGISLATION No. 35 OF 2009 ON DRUGS (Study of Judgment No. 446/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Gpr) Jasa Sudjana; Deny Guntara; Yuniar Rahmatiar
Justisi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 2 (2023): Justisi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum
Publisher : Program Studi Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Buana Perjuangan Karawang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36805/jjih.v8i2.5775

Abstract

Narcotics abuse is an act of crime, the problem of narcotics abuse has a very negative and detrimental impact both in terms of law, health, economics, politics, and socio-cultural life. Narcotics abuse has been regulated in Article 127 of Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics. As for the identification of the problem in this research study regarding the imposition of punishment against the perpetrators of the crime of class I drug abuse for themselves according to Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics and what are the considerations of the panel of judges in deciding a case against the perpetrators of the crime of class I drug abuse for themselves himself in decision no 446/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Gpr. In this study the aims were to find out the sentence imposed on the perpetrators of the crime of class 1 narcotics abuse for themselves according to Law No. 35 of 2009 and to find out the considerations of the panel of judges in deciding a case against the perpetrators of the crime of class I narcotics abuse for themselves in the decision number 446/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Gpr. The research method used in this study is a normative juridical research method using secondary data as the main data. The results of this study are based on Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics that perpetrators of class I drug abuse for themselves should receive medical and social rehabilitation, and the Decision of the Kediri District Court Number 446/Pid.Sus/2020PN.Gpr according to researchers there was a mistake and not in accordance with Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics.
LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF DELAY REPORTING OF SHARE ACQUISITION BETWEEN PT. AGRO PRATAMA AND PT. DHARMA SATYA NUSANTARA BASED ON LAW NUMBER 5 OF 1999 CONCERNING PROHIBITION OF MONOPOLY PRACTICES AND UNFAIR BUSINESS COMPETITION (KPPU Case Study Number 29/KPPU-M Annisa Putri azra; Anwar Hidayat; Yuniar Rahmatiar
Justisi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 2 (2023): Justisi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum
Publisher : Program Studi Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Buana Perjuangan Karawang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36805/jjih.v8i2.5776

Abstract

The acquisition of a company is a legal act carried out by a legal entity or an individual to take over the shares of a company by purchasing a portion or the entire wealth of the company. The problem identified in this research is why reporting of company share acquisitions to the Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition (KPPU) is only related to acquisitions that have material value and what are the legal consequences of the delay in acquiring company shares in Case Number 29/KPPU-M/2019. The purpose of this research is to understand the reasons why reporting of company share acquisitions to the KPPU is only related to acquisitions that have material value and to determine the legal consequences of the delay in acquiring company shares in Case Number 29/KPPU-M/2019. This research uses a normative juridical approach. The data collection technique used in this research is literature study using primary legal materials and secondary legal materials as data sources. In conclusion, the rules regarding non-material reporting are not explicitly stated in KPPU Regulation Number 1 of 2009 concerning Pre-Notification, Mergers, Consolidations, Acquisitions, and Takeovers. As for the alleged delay in reporting in the acquisition of the company, PT. Dharma Satya Nusantara is required to pay an administrative fine as a consequence of the delayed reporting, as stipulated in Article 29(1) of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition.
JURIDICAL REVIEW OF UNILATERAL ENGAGEMENT ANNULMENT AS AN UNLAWFUN ACT IN CONNECTION WITH CODE OF CIVIL LAW (CASE STUDY OF DECISION NUMBER 45/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Sng) Yustya Laraswati; Yuniar Rahmatiar; Muhamad Abas
Justisi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Vol 8 No 2 (2023): Justisi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum
Publisher : Program Studi Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Buana Perjuangan Karawang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36805/jjih.v8i2.5780

Abstract

According to Al-Hamdani, engagement is a man's request for another person's daughter or a woman who is under someone's guardianship, as an introduction before marriage. Engagement as a planned action is undeniable that it can be canceled for that action. The problems raised in this study are how the unlawful act in canceling a unilateral engagement according to the Civil Code and how the judge's considerations in lawsuit No. 45/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Sng. The purpose of this study is to find out how the cancellation of the engagement is said to be an unlawful act and to see the judge's considerations in granting the lawsuit Number: 45/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Sng. The research method used is a qualitative research method. Using a normative juridical approach and using data analysis methods, legal reasoning is problematic. The results of this study show that, in the decision of case No.45/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Sng, the judge considered that: unilateral cancellation of engagement categorized as unlawful acts is correct, in accordance with Article 1365 of the Civil Code. The Defendant unilaterally cancelled the engagement with the Plaintiff which has violated the norms of decency and decency in society.
Co-Authors Annisa Putri azra Anwar Hidayat Deny Guntara Jasa Sudjana Muhamad Abas Yustya Laraswati