ASAS TERBUKA UNTUK UMUM DAN KEHADIRAN FISIK PARA PIHAK DALAM SIDANG DI PENGADILAN NEGERI PASCA PERATURAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 1 TAHUN 2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 237-250
Author(s):  
Bernadette M Waluyo
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Basic Principle ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
District Court ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Court Proceedings

The Indonesian Supreme Court, in response to the information era, modernizes the civil procedural rules at the district court level.  This is done by issuing Supreme Court Regulation no. 1 of 2019 re. Administration of Justice at Civil Law Courts and Electronic-Court Proceedings. Undoubtedly, modernization of existing rules on the administration of justice is much needed.  On the other hand, these changes may violate a number of procedural civil law principles.  The author argues, from a civil procedural law perspective, that the above Supreme Court regulation violates the basic principle of transparency of court proceedings and physical attendance at court proceedings. 

The shape of Athenian laws

1998 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Carey
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Classical Period ◽  
Late Archaic ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Binary Division ◽  
Substantive Law

The title is unashamedly plagiarized from Stephen Todd's excellent book, The Shape of Athenian Law. The plagiarism is slightly misleading, however, since my interest is in law as enactment (Gesetz) while Todd's title expresses his interest in law as system (Recht). The issue I wish to address is the formulation of written laws in Athens during the late archaic and classical period, specifically the balance between procedural and substantive law. Substantive law deals with rights, obligations, offences, etc. Its role is to define behaviour which is required, allowed, or prohibited. These are what Hart terms ‘primary rules’. Procedural law, on the other hand, deals, as the name suggests, with the administration of justice, that is with jurisdiction, process, etc. Hart's term for these is ‘secondary rules’. The two cannot be separated quite as neatly as I have suggested, of course. A procedural law can scarcely avoid mentioning the offences or rights whose punishment or protection it regulates, while a substantive law may need to address issues such as jurisdiction. This is therefore an issue of orientation, not a simple binary division. However, as a broad basis for classification it is of value.

scholarly journals THE PROBLEMATICS OF EXECUTION LAW AGAINST NON-EXECUTABLE JUDGMENTS AND COMPARISONS WITH MALAYSIAN LAW

JURISDICTIE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 244
Author(s):  
Bambang Sugeng Ariadi Subagyono ◽  
Ghansham Anand
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Subject ◽  
Civil Case ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Laws

<p>In public courts, the litigation of civil case is under civil law procedure. This is a legal regulation to maintain material civil laws. The procedural law is also a way to file a particular civil case to civil court and to organize judges’ ways in making judgment toward legal subject. Civil law procedure prevents any vigilante actions that creates public legal order. Judiciaries provide protection for legal subject in preserving their rights and prevent any arbitrary actions. After case investigation process set under procedural law, a court judgment is made to judge and solve case. Legal actions are subsequently conducted to reach fixed legal judgment (inkracht van gewijsde). Some executions for civil cases in Indonesia is suspended since the object is different from reality or non-executable. Furthermore, civil case judgment is sometimes contradictory to criminal cases, although the objects are similar. Either litigant and/or defendant files request to the Supreme Court to have a legal protection or the chairman of district court requests for an instruction from the Supreme Court, may suspend court judgment. Therefore, the implementation of court judgments with legal power is still undeniably problematic. If the execution is suspended or not allowed, it may disadvantage “the justice seekers”; public society. The suspended or non-executable judgment should be immediately addressed on its implementation, instead of its law.</p><p><br />Di pengadilan umum, proses kasus perdata berada dalam prosedur hukum perdata. Ini adalah peraturan hukum untuk mempertahankan hukum sipil material. Undang-Undang prosedural ialah cara mengajukan kasus perdata ke pengadilan sipil dan mengatur cara hakim memutuskan subjek hukum. Prosedur hukum perdata bertujuan mencegah tindakan hakim-sendiri sehingga tercipta tatanan hukum publik. Peradilan memberikan perlindungan bagi subjek hukum dalam melestarikan haknya dan mencegah kesewenang-wenangan. Setelah proses penyelidikan kasus sebagaimana diatur dalam hukum prosedural, putusan pengadilan dibuat untuk menilai dan memecahkan kasus. Tindakan hukum selanjutnya dilakukan hingga mendapat keputusan hukum tetap (inkracht van gewijsde). Beberapa putusan kasus perdata Indonesia ditangguhkan karena objek berbeda dari kenyataan atau tidak dapat dieksekusi. Selanjutnya, putusan kasus perdata terkadang bertentangan dengan kasus pidana, meskipun objeknya sama. Baik penggugat dan/atau terdakwa mengajukan permintaan ke Mahkamah Agung untuk memiliki perlindungan hukum atau ketua dari pengadilan distrik meminta instruksi dari Mahkamah Agung, bisa menangguhkan keputusan pengadilan. Karenanya, pelaksanaan putusan pengadilan dengan kekuatan hukum masih bermasalah. Jika eksekusi ditangguhkan atau tidak diizinkan, tentu dapat merugikan “para pencari keadilan”; masyarakat umum. Putusan yang ditangguhkan atau tidak dapat dieksekusi harus segera ditangani pada pelaksanaannya, bukan hukumnya.</p>

scholarly journals Analisis Pengaturan Hukum Acara Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 109
Author(s):  
Doni Budiono
Keyword(s):  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Debt Payment

In carrying out its business, businessmen often establish a debt agreement. Debt agreements are a common thing between creditors and debtors. However, at times, it may cause a dispute between debtors who are negligent and unable to pay their debts to creditors. One of the eff orts to overcome the unpaid debt is through Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations petitioned by the debtors or the creditors. Bankruptcy is the general seizure of all the assets of a bankrupt debtor whose management and settlement is carried out by the Curator under the supervision of the Supervisory Judge. On the other hand, Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) is the settlement of the debt, also aiming to establish a peace off er that includes off ers of partial payment or whole payment of the debt to the creditors. Bankruptcy and PKPU in its implementation have been regulated in Indonesian Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations, Herziene Indonesisch Reglement (HIR), Reglement of De Rechtsvordering (Rv), Buitengewesten Rechtsreglement (RBg), and further stipulated in the Civil Law Procedure-Draft. In Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation’s procedural law arrangements contained in various regulations and in the Civil Law Procedure-Draft, there are shortcomings that need to be analyzed to provide a legal basis for Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations procedural law arrangements. Considering the upcoming legalization of the Civil Law Procedure-Draft, this study will analyze several important points that can be used as a reference for the Civil Law Procedure-Draft. 

scholarly journals WYDANIE LISTU ŻELAZNEGO JAKO REZULTAT PERTRAKTACJI PROCESOWYCH

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 231
Author(s):  
Edward Struczyk
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
District Court ◽  
Normative Structure ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Administration Of Justice

The Safe - conduct Decision Issue as a Result of the Proceedings NegotiationSummaryThe article presents the normative structure of the safe-conduct perceived as a way to enter into a contract between the defendant and a competent district court. In principle, the settlement prevents the defendant from being arrested. But on the other hand the safe-conduct benefits the administration of justice by making it possible to initiate penal proceedings against such a defendant. The mutual advantages bought by the safe-conduct decision allow us to treat the preceding procedure as a phase of the proceedings negotiation.

scholarly journals ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY AS REGULATORY FACTORS OF CIVIL LAW OF UKRAINE: THE ISSUE OF VALIDITY

2019 ◽  
pp. 16-20
Author(s):  
V. Кroitor
Keyword(s):  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
Regulatory Factors ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Moral Rules ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One

The article studies the issue of scientific and practical validity of applying ethical principles of society as regulatory factors of civil law of Ukraine. Taking into account the lack of validity of ethical principles of society as regulatory factors, the author attempts to make a correlation between the content of such principles of civil law as fairness, integrity and reasonableness, on the one hand, and ethical principles of the society, on the other hand. The author of the paper proves that it is inappropriate to apply the provisions of morality as regulatory factors for the regulation of civil relations. The conclusion on the objection to the civil regularity of ethical principles of society is based on several theses. Firstly, moral rules are not formalized, which creates a threat of arbitrary interpretation of their content. Secondly, ethical principles do not have a definite source of origin. Thirdly, the fundamental ethical rules have already been taken into account in the content of the principles of fairness, integrity and reason, which in turn create competition between the two types of regulatory factors. Unreasonable duplication of regulatory requirements reduces the functionality of the law, complicates the perception of its requirements. The competition between the principles of law and the ethical principles of society must be eliminated by refusing to give the latter the function of regulatory factors. The author of the paper does not deny the possibility of taking into account the ethical principles of society while regulating the relations that have been neglected by the "official law".

scholarly journals Kekuatan Pembuktian Fotokopi Surat yang Tidak Dapat Dicocokkan dengan Aslinya dalam Perkara Perdata

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-352
Author(s):  
Devina Puspita Sari
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
District Court ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
High Court ◽  
Original Letter ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Opposing Party ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Valid Evidence

The photocopy acceptable in the court if it matched with the original letter and the strength of that photocopy is the same as the original letter. However, sometimes the original letter has been lost so that it cannot be shown at trial. This paper discusses whether a photocopy that cannot be matched with the original letter can be accepted in the civil procedural law and if it can be accepted how the strength of it, then the discussion will look at the judge’s consideration in two cases related to the issue. The results of discussions are that photocopies that cannot be matched with the original letter can be accepted as evidence if the photocopy matches or is strengthened with other evidence, as the jurisprudence of Decision Nr. 112 K/Pdt/1996 and Decision Nr. 410 K/pdt/2004. The jurisprudence has been followed by similar cases, which is the Decision of the Central Jakarta District Court Nr. 164/Pdt.G/2004/PN.Jkt.Pst jo. Decision of The Jakarta High Court Nr. 234/Pdt/2005/PT.DKI jo. Decision of The Supreme Court Nr. 1498 K/Pdt/2006 which in this case a photocopy can be accepted because it is strengthened by the recognition of the opposing party and The Pontianak District Court Nr.52/Pdt.G/2003/PN.Ptk which received a photocopy because it was strengthened with  witness testimony. The photocopy has a free power of proof (depends on the judge’s assessment). The use and assessment of the strength of the photocopy cannot be independent, but must be linked to other valid evidence. Abstrak Fotokopi surat dapat diterima dalam persidangan apabila dapat dicocokkan dengan aslinya, dan kekuatan pembuktiannya sama seperti surat aslinya. Tulisan ini membahas, dalam hal surat aslinya tidak dapat ditunjukkan di persidangan, apakah fotokopi surat dapat diterima dalam pembuktian hukum acara perdata, dan, apabila dapat diterima, bagaimanakah kekuatan pembuktiannya. Artikel ini menunjukkan, fotokopi surat yang tidak dapat dicocokkan dengan aslinya dapat diterima sebagai alat bukti surat jika bersesuaian atau dikuatkan dengan alat bukti lain, sebagaimana Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 112 K/Pdt/1996 dan Putusan Nomor 410 K/pdt/2004 yang telah menjadi yurisprudensi. Yurisprudensi ini telah diikuti dalam perkara serupa, yaitu dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat Nomor 164/Pdt.G/2004/PN.Jkt.Pst jo. Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Jakarta Nomor 234/Pdt/2005/PT.DKI jo. Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1498 K/Pdt/2006, di mana dalam perkara ini fotokopi surat dapat diterima karena dikuatkan dengan pengakuan pihak lawan. Demikian juga dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Pontianak Nomor 52/Pdt.G/2003/PN.Ptk, yang menerima fotokopi surat yang tidak dapat dicocokkan dengan aslinya karena dikuatkan dengan alat bukti keterangan saksi. Dengan demikian, fotokopi surat memiliki kekuatan pembuktian yang bebas, artinya diserahkan kepada penilaian hakim. Penggunaan dan penilaian kekuatan pembuktian fotokopi tersebut tidak dapat berdiri sendiri, tetapi harus dikaitkan dengan alat bukti lainnya yang sah.  

Introduction

Japanese Law ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Oda
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Legal Consciousness ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Japanese Law

Japanese law is part of the Civil law (Franco-German) legal system. There have been discussions on the ‘Japanese legal consciousness’, but now, it is agreed that there is no such ‘uniqueness’ of Japanese law. On the other hand, the approach of the courts in interpreting statutes and their role in interpreting contracts may represent some unique aspects of Japanese law.

Part I The Doctrine of Res Judicata in Litigation, 1 The Doctrine of Res Judicata in Domestic Laws

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schaffstein Silja
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Other Hand

This chapter analyses and compares the application of the res judicata doctrine in common and civil law countries. Res judicata is the principle that a matter may not, generally, be relitigated once it has been judged on the merits. The doctrine of res judicata is well established in common law jurisdictions, and allows for several res judicata pleas, namely the plea of cause of action estoppel, issue estoppel, former recovery, or abuse of process. On the other hand, the doctrine of res judicata in civil law countries recognises only one plea. In France, for instance, the doctrine of res judicata is referred to as ‘autorité de chose jugxée’. A judgment obtains ‘autorité de chose jugée’ when it is rendered, whether or not a means of recourse is available against the judgment.

scholarly journals SINKRONISASI DAN DIFERENSIASI PUTUSAN HAKIM DALAM PENYELESAIAN KASUS-KASUS KEKERASAN DALAM RUMAH TANGGA

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tjokorda Istri Putra Astiti
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Gender Equity ◽  
Violence Against Women ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Gender Justice ◽  
High Court ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
And Gender

This study specifically aims to assess synchronization and differentiation between the judge's decision, both horizontally and vertically, especially with regard todomestic violence cases. In addition, this study also intends to study about rule  whichare  applied by the Judges on the cases, and  reveal whether the  decision  under reviewreflects the gender justice This research is a legal normative research using case approach which wasexamined by studying the Judge’s decision in concrete cases, especially with regard todomestic violence. The number of decisions that were examined are six decisions whichconsists of three decisions of the District Court (Pengadilan Negeri) and  threedecisions  of the High Court (Pengadilan Tinggi). The decisions are determined bypurposive sampling.  Based on the analysis of the six decisions mentioned above ,  can be concludedas following:1)  The rule applied by the judge in hanling the concrete cases  regarding domestic violence particularly violence against women is on the Domestic Violence Act ( ActNo. 23/2004 ) with the application of a kind of sanction of imprisonment rangingfrom 1-3 months, that varied there the defendant was arrested some are droppedwith conditional (pidana bersyarat) (not being held prisoner) 2)  Among the three decisions of the District Court and the three decitions of the HighCourt which have analysed,  in one hand show synchronization and the other hand show differentiation.  In this case, synchronization and differentiation  can be seen vertically (between the District Court and the High Court decision), andhorizontally (between the District Court to each other) or between the decision ofthe High Court to each other).  3)  That the decision of the District and the High Court,  either have reflected gendersensitively and gender equity.

scholarly journals Nuevos enfoques de la independencia judicial. Dos puntas de iceberg en la reforma de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial: la comisión permanente del CGPJ y el gabinete técnico del Tribunal Supremo

2016 ◽  
pp. 375
Author(s):  
Rosa María Fernández Riveira
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
The Other ◽  
General Council ◽  
The Political ◽  
Permanent Commission ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Made In

Este trabajo estudia dos reformas concretas de la Ley orgánica del Poder Judicial que se producen en octubre de 2015: la Comisión Permanente, como órgano del Consejo que ve incrementado su número de vocales, sus competencias y que situado bajo la dirección del Presidente del Consejo ha ido creciendo en relevancia; y el Gabinete Técnico del Tribunal Supremo, que se regula también como órgano al servicio del Tribunal pero bajo la obediencia y dirección del Presidente. Un órgano que asume unas competencias muy importantes en un momento en el que se reforma la vieja casación pasando a ser un recurso determinado por el «interés casacional objetivo». Estos dos cambios, como puntas de iceberg, son el aviso de nuevos enfoques sobre planteamientos clásicos acerca de la independencia judicial tales como: las relaciones existentes entre el Consejo General del Poder judicial y el Tribunal Supremo, la presencia del elemento político en el corazón de la independencia judicial, la enorme relevancia de un proceso de selección de nuestros jueces justo, plural y confiable y la necesidad de articular mecanismos de responsabilidad judicial institucional e individual.This paper analyses two reforms about Organic Law of Judiciary which have been made in October 2015: the Permanent Commission as part of Council body that it has seen increasing its competences and it works under careful supervision of the President of the General Council of the Judiciary. It has suffered an augmentation of members on its composition and it has got more relevance as important voice in the General Council and, on the other hand, the Technical office of the Supreme Court, which has been redesigned with new competences working under Instructions of President. And all these changes are been implemented at the same time that it has been adopted the new cassation appeal. Both reforms as iceberg’s tips are performing important reflections about classical principles for example: different manners to understand the judicial independence, the political element within judicial independence, the relevance of appointment judicial processes and of course the accountability discourse as essential part within the judicial independence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document