Articles
10 Documents
Search results for
, issue
" Vol 2, No 2 (2016)"
:
10 Documents
clear
<![CDATA[Kekuatan Hukum Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) Dalam Hukum Perjanjian Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Pratama, Gita Nanda]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2274
<![CDATA[AbstractMemorandum of Understanding (MoU), made orally or in written form, is used as the basis for drafting a contract containing elaboration of the partiesâ specific rights and duties. MoU may thus be understood as a preliminary agreement to draft a contract. The author, starting from the Indonesian contract law, intend to analyze the extent to which MoU may be considered legally binding by the parties. To that purpose a comparison with how common law system recognize and regulate MoU will be considered necessary. The authorâs main argument is that, notwithstanding the fact that there is no rule explicitly recognizing or mentioning the name, MoUâs containing the main understandings reached by parties should be treated as morally binding by the parties.]]>
<![CDATA[Prinsip Moral Sebagai Klaim Pada Hak Cipta Dan Hak Untuk Dilupakan (Right To Be Forgotten) ]]>
<![CDATA[Pratama, Bambang]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2270
<![CDATA[AbstractIn this current digital era, the issue how to protect private-personal electronic or digital data creates the need for the recognition of a new legal right (right to be forgotten/right to delete). Legal recognition of this right must be balanced with the duty of internet service provider to control and monitor the dispersion of negative content (resulting in copyright infringements, infringements of the sanctity of personal-private data, etc.). With the amendment of Law No. 11 of 2008 re. Electronic Information and Transactions, it becomes appropriate to discuss the right to be forgotten in terms of moral principles. The existence of this moral right is reflected in the legal protection of copyright as well as protection of private-personal data. The main argument here is that moral principle or right as part of natural law should be used to explain the existence and importance of the right to be forgotten.]]>
<![CDATA[Tinjauan Atas Kesiapan Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Dan Perumahan Rakyat Terkait Keikutsertaan Indonesia Dalam Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) ]]>
<![CDATA[Hestuleksono, Aryo]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2275
<![CDATA[AbstarctBasically ratification of the GPA for Indonesia is the opening of the Indonesian market (market access) to the entrepreneur/companies from other countries, which means allowing entrepreneur/foreign companies to participate in the process of procurement of goods and services (PBJ) government in Indonesia. Similarly, the reverse with Indonesian companies. The existence of market acess makes the relation between national with international law. This is a reason of authors are interested to know further the relationship conformity with international law related to the readiness of the national Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing (PUPR) when Indonesia ratified the GPA views of the setting methods for selecting/ auction in the construction sector in national legislation. The method used is a normative juridical research and the purpose of research to give recommendation to the Ministry PUPR particularly regarding setting methods for selecting the procurement of construction services when Indonesia ratified the GPA. If viewed from the side PBJ arrangements in the Government in the field of construction, especially regarding the purpose, principles and method of election of, the results showed that Ministry PUPR not ready when Indonesia ratified the GPA, because there is a difference between setting purpose PBJ contained in Perpres No. 54/2010 and its amendments as well as Permen PU No 07/2010 and amendments that more give protection to national companies, while GPA has the open principle. In addition there are differences about the method of selecting good views of the types/forms (nomenclature) and its meaning. So that when Indonesia will ratify the GPA, the Government and the Ministry PUPR in particular need to make adjustments to the "purpose" of regulation PBJ as contained in the Perpres/Permen PU with "purpose" contained in the GPA. Similarly, adjustments to the forms (nomenclature) and the meaning of the audition method.]]>
<![CDATA[Liberalisasi Fee Advokat: Antara Perlindungan Dan Kompetisi Terhadap Advokat Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Delarosa, Stella]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2271
<![CDATA[Abstract This article analyses issues related to the implementation of fee liberalization by the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and its effect to the legal service business sector. Indonesian lawyers, as a consequence, will then have to compete with foreign legal service providers. It is assumed that through fair and transparent competition a more accountable business atmosphere can be created. However, a number of legal regulations at the national level establishes non-trade barriers, effectively obstructing the AECâ market liberalization project. The authors standing here is that the policy of protecting domestic lawyers or advocates should be rescinded and to that purpose Indonesia should amend the prevailing Law on Advocate.]]>
<![CDATA[Mempertimbangkan Kembali Orientasi Gerakan Bantuan Hukum Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Wiratraman, Herlambang P]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2276
<![CDATA[AbstractThis article discusses the practice of individual and structural legal aid and how it has been contextualized within the dynamic of Indonesian politics and law making (especially related to Law No. 16 of 2011 re. Legal Aid). The main question addressed is the extent to which legal aid succeed in pushing real legal reform and contribute to the effort of realizing a just society. Unfortunately, the author discovers that legal reform initiated post Soeharto, initially held to be positive, failed to fulfills its intended goals. Instead law implementation and enforcement remains vulnerable to external pressure and in fact had been unable to stop on-going human rights violations and widespread corruption.]]>
<![CDATA[Sistem Perlindungan Atas Ciptaan Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 28 Tahun 2014 Tentang Hak Cipta Dalam Perspektif Cyber Law ]]>
<![CDATA[Sudjana, Sudjana]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2267
<![CDATA[AbstractThe purpose of this article is to discuss, from the perspective of cyber law, the relevant rules and regulation as found in the prevailing law on copyright (Law No. 28 of 2014) and how it provides effective protection to copyright creations. The author shall highlight the most important rules and norms or principles. The discussion shows that a number of rules in the Law No. 28 of 2014 has not been able to fully accommodate the need to respond to new development in virtual technology. A number of issues concerning who enjoy protection, the object being protected, registration system, period of protection, restriction on copyright and its relation to educational interest and scientific research still needs to be regulated in detail.]]>
<![CDATA[Resentralisasi Dalam Pembagian Kewenangan Pemanfaatan Energi Panas Bumi ]]>
<![CDATA[Prabowo, Canggih]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2272
<![CDATA[AbstractThe promulgation of Law no. 23 of 2014 re. Local Government, strengthening local governmentâs authority, is expected to provide a way out to the problem of how to harvest geothermal energy found in forest protected areas (within the jurisdiction of local government) to supply the increasing demand for electricity throughout Indonesia. For more than 10 years after the promulgation of Law no. 32 of 2004, the central government program to accelerate the utilization of geothermal energy source found within protected forest zones had come to a full stop. This article discusses the issue of how government authority (central-local) related to the above problem had been distributed and the existing tension between central-local government.  The central government tendency to take back authorities previously granted to local authorities defies the whole effort at making government more accountable, efficient and prevention of externalities.]]>
<![CDATA[Prinsip Common But Differentiated Responsibility Dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup, Sumber Daya Alam Dan Hutan Tropis ]]>
<![CDATA[Oktoberina, Sri Rahayu]]>;
<![CDATA[Moeliono, Tristam P]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2268
<![CDATA[AbstractThe common but differentiated responsibility is or will become an important principle of international environmental law, specifically related to the management of tropical rain forest. The issue at hand is how this principle is understood by developing states, which by its geographical position, is entrusted with the responbility to manage tropical rain forest. In this article the author traces the reason justifying the differentiation of (international) responsibilities and attempts to relate this (mis-) understanding of the principle to Indonesiaâ s unwillingness or inability to manage its tropical rain forest.]]>
<![CDATA[Kajian Kriminologi Terhadap Upaya Penanganan Kasus Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga (KDRT) Di Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Merung, Prisilla Viviane]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2273
<![CDATA[AbstractDomestic violence had been and is still underreported. Inhibiting factor is the widely held perception that outside intervention in cases of domestic violence is unwelcome and asking outside help will bring shame to the family. It is and should be treated by family members among themselves. To make matter worse, there is the general tendency to shift the blame to the victim. This article discusses domestic violence, especially those directed against women, from the legal (normative) as well as criminological perspective. It is telling that after its recognition as a special crime by virtue of the Penal Code (in general terms) and by Law no. 23 of 2004 re. abolition of domestic violence, the public perception shifted for the better. Consequently, more and more victims of domestic violence, with the support of their families, report their case to the police.]]>
<![CDATA[Keadilan Restoratif Dan Pembatasan Diversi Pada Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 Tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak ]]>
<![CDATA[Dewantary, Zenny Rezania]]>
<![CDATA[ Veritas et Justitia Vol 2, No 2 (2016) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Parahyangan Catholic University ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.25123/vej.2269
<![CDATA[AbstractSince 1997 Indonesia possessed a Law specifically regulating child court (Law No. 3 of 1997). The lawâs perspective, however, was still based on retributive justice. This was apparent in how the court handles juvenile delinquents. To provide better protection to the handling of children before criminal courts, the government amended Law No. 3 of 1997 by Law No. 11 of 2012 re. Juvenile Court System. This new law was founded upon the theory of restorative justice and provide for diversion. Diversion is used to prevent children from being sent to prison and in general purports to improve societal condition. This article discusses problems related to the use of diversion. One recommendation offered is that diversion should be taken into consideration without discrimination, not only in the case the penal sanction is below 7 years (imprisonment) but also above this number. In deciding the need for diversion, while also taking into consideration the seriousness of the crime committed, expediency should also be a deciding factor.]]>
