Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"To describe legal ground for operasionalization of Baitul Qiradh activity is the main purpose of this research. The legal ground is founded in funding contract through Bairul Qiradh. The article also describes the limit of responsibility to depositors. Data needed for this research is primery and secondary data. The primery data was gotten by interviewing respondents and informant, while the secondary data was obtained through library research. The result of research shows that Baitul Qiradh is a financial institution, but we cannot call as a banking institution, and also it is not based on license of public institution, so that its existance is quite weak based on the finance law. The form of the business borad whose name is Kelompok_Swadaya Masyarakat (KSM) is not known in positive Iaw system. Although, the board can called as civil association which responsibility is unlimited."

"Pengadaan Barang dan Jasa dilakukan dengan dasar suatu kontrak. Penandatanganan dan pengendalian kontrak tersebut dilakukan oleh pihak yang mewakili Pemerintah. Pemerintah tetap memiliki kedudukan dalam kontrak pasca kontrak tersebut ditandatangani. Pejabat Pembuat Komitmen atau pejabat yang mengendalikan kontrak tidak dapat melakasanakan kewajibannya akibat terjerat perkara pidana tidak membuat kontrak berakhir, serta mengharuskan adanya pihak yang bertanggung jawab atas pengendalian kontrak. Dalam kontrak pengadaan 36 unit single bus antara PT X dan Badan Publik Y, PPK dalam pengadaan tersebut tersangkut perkara korupsi. Hal tersebut mengakibatkan PT X membutuhkan perlindungan hukum mengenai penyelesaian kontraknya. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode penelitian yuridis normatif. Pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan data sekunder. Penelitian ini memiliki hasil bahwa Badan Publik Y merupakan pihak dalam kontrak pengadaan barang dan jasa yang harus bertanggung jawab dalam pengendalian kontrak pasca PPK terjerat perkara pidana dengan menunjuk pejabat atau PPK yang baru.

---

The procurement of goods and services is conducted on the basis of a contract. The signing and control of the contract is carried out by a party representing the Government. The government retains a position as a party in the contract after the contract is signed. Pejabat Pembuat Komitmen has no longer has authority on implementation of the contract as a result of a criminal case. It does not terminate the contract, and requires a party to be liable for controlling the contract. In the contract for the procurement of 36 single buses between PT X and Public Agency Y, PPK and all elements in the procurement were involved in corruption cases. This resulted in PT X requiring legal protection regarding the completion of its contract. This research was conducted using a normative juridical research method. Data collection is done with secondary data. The result of this research is the Public Agency Y is a party to the contract for the procurement of goods and services that must be responsible for controlling the contract with a designation of new PPK after the former PPK is caught in a criminal case.

"

"Tesis ini mengemukakan analisis bentuk perlindungan hukum terhadap Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah (PPAT) pasca perubahan Pasal 66 Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No.2 Tahun 2014 Tentang Jabatan Notaris berdasarkan Putusan Majelis Pengawas Daerah No.57/UM/MPD/Kab.Bogor/V/2018. Adapun rumusan masalah yang dibahas pada tesis ini adalah mengenai bentuk perlindungan hukum terhadap PPAT setelah diterbitkannya Peraturan Menteri Agraria dan Tata Ruang/ Kepala Badan Pertanahan Nasional Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2018 tentang Pembinaan dan Pengawasan Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah ("Permen ATR No.2 Tahun 2018"), perbandingan perlindungan hukum dan pengawasan antara Notaris dan PPAT dalam memberikan perlindungan dan kepastian hukum, serta upaya hukum pembeli atas Putusan MPD No.57/UM/MPD/Kab.Bogor/V/2018 dan perlindungan hukum terhadap pembeli. Metode penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif, bersifat deskriptif analitis, dengan alat pengumpul data studi kepustakaan menggunakan data sekunder dan menggunakan metode analisis kualitatif. Perlindungan hukum terhadap PPAT ini berbeda dengan perlindungan hukum terhadap Notaris sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004, walaupun dengan telah diterbitkan Permen ATR No.2 Tahun 2018. Profesi jabatan PPAT kurang dilindungi dibandingkan dengan Notaris yang memiliki organ Majelis Kehormatan Notaris dalam memberi keputusan menyetujui atau menolak suatu pemanggilan penyidikan. Belum diterbitkannya petunjuk pelaksana dari Permen ATR No.2 Tahun 2018 membuat perlindungan hukum terhadap PPAT belum terlaksana dengan sempurna sebagaimana halnya terhadap Notaris.

---

This research reveals an analysis legal protection form for Land Deed Making Officials (PPAT) Subsequent to the Amendment of Article 66 of Law of the Republic of Indonesia No.2 Year 2014 Concerning Notary Profession based on the Decision of the Regional Supervisory Council No.57/UM/MPD/Kab. Bogor/V/2018. The problem construction which discussed in this research is about the form of legal protection against PPAT after the issuance of regulation of the Minister of Agrarian and Spatial/Head of national Land Agency of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 year 2018 about the Construction and Supervision of land deed official ("Permen ATR No. 2 years 2018"), the discrepancy of legal protection and supervision between notary Public and PPAT in providing the protection and legal certainty, and the buyer's legal efforts on the verdict MPD No. 57/UM/MPD/ Kab. Bogor/V/2018 and legal protection against buyers. This research method uses the normative juridical method, an analytical descriptive, with the library of data collection tools using secondary data and using qualitative analysis methods. The law protection for PPAT is different from the legal protection of the notary as stipulated in the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 2 of 2014 on the Amendment to Law No. 30 of 2004, although with the published of Permen ATR No. 2 year 2018. The profession of the PPAT is less protected than the notary public who owns the organs of the notary assembly in making the decision to approve or reject a call of inquiry. Not published instructions for the implementation of Permen ATR No. 2 year 2018 makes legal protection against PPAT has not been carried out perfectly as is the case against notary."

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas mengenai perlindungan hukum bagi pemegang Hak Milik Atas Satuan Rumah Susun yang hak atas tanah bersamanya berada diatas tanah Hak Pengelolaan, dengan analisa kasus Apartemen Mangga Dua Court yang dalam hal ini para pemegang Hak Milik Atas Satuan Rumah Susun baru mengetahui status tanah bersama dari Apartemen yang mereka miliki adalah Hak Guna Bangunan diatas tanah Hak Pengelolaan bukan Hak Guna Bangunan diatas tanah Negara. Digunakan metode penelitian kepustakaan yang bertujuan untuk menemukan masalah (problem finding) untuk kemudian menuju pada suatu penelitian untuk mengatasi masalah (problem solution). Permasalahan timbul pada saat para pemegang Hak Milik Atas Satuan Rumah Susun dari Apartemen Mangga Dua Court akan memperpanjang hak atas tanah bersamanya, dan dalam proses perpanjangan hak tersebut, mereka diwajibkan untuk mendapatkan Rekomendasi dari pemegang Hak Pengelolaan dengan membayar Uang Pemasukan yang jumlahnya jauh lebih besar dari Uang Pemasukan yang dibayarkan kepada Negara. Pemegang Hak Milik Atas Satuan Rumah Susun dari Apartemen Mangga Dua Court yang diwakili oleh Perhimpunan Penghuninya mengajukan gugatan perdata pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat dengan Nomor Perkara 205/Pdt.G/2007/PN.Jkt.Pst dan telah mendapatkan Putusannya. Penelitian ini membahas mengenai perbedaan antara rumah susun yang tanah bersamanya berada diatas tanah Negara dengan rumah susun yang tanah bersamanya berada diatas tanah Hak Pengelolaan, hal-hal yang harus diperhatikan dalam rangka pembangunan rumah susun yang yang tanah bersamanya berada diatas tanah Hak Pengelolaan dan perlindungan hukum bagi pemegang Hak Milik Atas Satuan Rumah Susun yang tanah bersamanya berada diatas tanah Hak Pengelolaan.

---

ABSTRACT

This thesis deals with legal protection for the Holder of Ownership Right on Apartment Unit whose Joint Land Rights is upon the Land having the status of Management Rights, with a case analysis of Mangga Dua Court Apartment which in this case the Holders of Ownership Right on Apartment Unit has recently known the Joint Land status of Apartment is Building Rights on the Land having the status of Management Rights instead of Building Rights upon the State Land. Bibliographical research method is applied with the purpose of problem finding which then heading toward a research to resolve the problem (problem solution). The problem arises when the Holders of Ownership Right on Apartment Unit of Mangga Dua Court Apartment extend their Joint Land Rights, and during the process of said rights extension, and in the process of the right renewal, they are obliged to get a recommendation from the Management Right owner by paying revenue money which mounted bigger than Revenue Money that are paid for the government. The Holders of Ownership Right on Apartment Unit of Mangga Dua Court Apartment who was represented by its Occupants Association filed a civil suit to the District Court of Central Jakarta under Case Number 205/Pdt.G/2007/PN.Jkt.Pst and has obtained its Verdict. This research deals with the difference between Apartment whose Joint Land is on the State Land and Apartment which Joint Land is on Land having the status of Management Rights, the matters that must be taken into consideration within the framework of building Apartment whose Joint land is on Land having the status of Management Rights and legal protection for the Holder of Ownership Right on Apartment Unit whose Joint land is on land having the status of Management Rights."

"Segala tindakan terhadap harta bersama dalam perkawinan seharusnya dilakukan atas persetujuan suami dan istri. Hal tersebut dikarenakan sejak dilangsungkannya perkawinan, harta yang diperoleh baik oleh suami maupun istri, sepanjang tidak adanya perjanjian kawin, maka kepemilikan atas harta tersebut dilakukan secara bersama-sama. Namun dalam kenyataannya ditemukan tindakan terhadap harta bersama dalam perkawinan yang dilakukan secara sepihak (dalam hal ini suami yang melakukannya) sebagaimana kasus dalam Putusan Pengadilan Agama Palembang Nomor 1594/Pdt.G/2022/PA.PLG. Oleh karena itu penelitian ini dimaksudkan untuk menganalisis perlindungan hukum bagi istri atas perbuatan melawan hukum dalam pembuatan akta wasiat oleh suami dan pertanggungjawaban notaris yang membuat akta wasiat tersebut. Penelitian hukum ini berbentuk doktrinal dengan menggunakan data sekunder yang dikumpulkan melalui studi kepustakaan. Selanjutnya data tersebut dianalisis secara kualitatif. Dari hasil analisis dapat dijelaskan bahawa perlindungan hukum bagi istri atas harta bersama yang dijadikan objek wasiat oleh suami tanpa sepengetahuannya diatur dalam Pasal 36 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1974 tentang Perkawinan dan Pasal 92 Kompilasi Hukum Islam, yang mana berdasarkan kedua ketentuan tersebut dinyatakan bahwa untuk dapat bertindak dan mengalihkan harta bersama, harus berdasarkan persetujuan kedua belah pihak. Adapun dalam kaitannya dengan notaris yang membuat akta wasiat atas harta bersama secara sepihak (tanpa sepengetahuan istri), dapat dinyatakan bahwa notaris tersebut harus bertanggung jawab sesuai dengan ketentuan Pasal 16 ayat (11) dan ayat (12), serta Pasal 44 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris sebagaimana telah diubah melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan atas Undnag-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris. Berdasarkan ketentuan tersebut, notaris dapat dikenakan sanksi administratif atau pun dituntut penggantian biaya, ganti rugi dan bunga oleh istri.

---

All actions regarding joint assets in marriage should be carried out with the consent of the husband and wife. This is because since the marriage took place, assets acquired by both husband and wife, as long as there is no marriage agreement, ownership of these assets is carried out jointly. However, in reality it was found that actions against joint property in marriage were carried out unilaterally (in this case the husband did it) as was the case in the Palembang Religious Court Decision Number 1594/Pdt.G/2022/PA.PLG. Therefore, this research is intended to analyze legal protection for wives for unlawful acts in making a will deed by their husband and the responsibility of the notary who made the will deed. This legal research takes a doctrinal form using secondary data collected through literature study. Next, the data was analyzed qualitatively. From the results of the analysis, it can be explained that legal protection for wives for joint property which is made the object of a will by the husband without his knowledge is regulated in Article 36 paragraph (1) of Law Number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage and Article 92 of the Compilation of Islamic Law, which is based on both provisions. It is stated that in order to act and transfer joint assets, it must be based on the agreement of both parties. As for the notary who makes a deed of will on joint assets unilaterally (without the wife's knowledge), it can be stated that the notary must be responsible in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 paragraph (11) and paragraph (12), as well as Article 44 of Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notaries as amended by Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notaries. Based on these provisions, the notary can be subject to administrative sanctions or be sued for reimbursement of costs, compensation and interest by the wife."

"[ABSTRAKTesis ini berjudul Analisis Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Pembuat Kebijakan Di Bank Indonesia Dalam Menjalankan Fungsinya Sebagai Lender of The Last Resort. Tugas sebagai Lender of The Last Resort (LoLR) merupakan tugas yang melekat dalam sejarah keberadaan bank sentral. LoLR dalam sistem keuangan Indonesia ditujukan untuk membantu bank-bank yang mengalami kesulitan likuiditas dan berfungsi untuk mencegah terjadinya krisis keuangan yang sistemik. Sebagai bank sentral, tugas LoLR tidak lepas dengan tugas dan kewenangan Bank Indonesia. Namun demikian, dalam pelaksanaan tugas LoLR ini beberapa kali pembuat kebijakan di Bank Indonesia terkait dengan kasus hukum.Oleh karena itu, perlindungan hukum bagi para pejabat pengambil kebijakan atau keputusan di Bank Indonesia sangatlah penting, apalagi kebijakan erat kaitannya dengan diskresi yang apabila menyangkut urusan pemerintahan akan lebih mengutamakan pencapaian tujuan sasarannya (doelmatigheid) daripada legalitas hukum yang berlaku (rechtsmatigheid).Terdapat 2 (dua) permasalahan yang dikaji dalam penelitian ini yaitu bagaimana pengaturan perlindungan hukum bagi pembuat kebijakan di Bank Indonesia dan bagaimana ketentuan perlindungan hukum yang diberikan kepada pegawai dan pejabat pengambil keputusan dengan ketentuan yang berlaku. Penelitian dalam tesis ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif yang bersifat deskriptif analitis dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan ketentuan serta analisis konsep hukum. Bahan hukum yang digunakan terdiri dari bahan hukum primer berupa perundang-undangan dan ketentuan, bahan hukum sekunder berupa literatur yang berkaitan dengan permasalahan, dan bahan hukum tersier berupa kamus hukum dan artikel.Bentuk pengaturan hukum terhadap perlindungan hukum diatur dalam Pasal 45 Undang-Undang No. 23 Tahun 1999 Tentang Bank Indonesia sebagaimana telah diubah beberapa kali terakhir dengan Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 6 Tahun 2009 dan Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor No.11/10/PDG/2009 tentang Bantuan Hukum. Perlindungan hukum ditujukan untuk menciptakan suasana kerja yang kondusif guna meningkatkan kinerja pelaksana tugas kedinasan Bank Indonesia dalam menghadapi permasalahan hukum yang semakin kompleks dan berkembang. Prinsip penyediaan perlindungan hukum adalah bahwa pegawai atau pejabat BI tidak dapat dihukum atas pelaksanaan tugas dan wewenangnya atau karena telah mengambil keputusan yang diperlukan dalam melaksanakan tugas dan wewenangnya, sepanjang dilakukan dengan itikad baik dan sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis entitled Analysis of Legal Protection for Policy Makers in Bank Indonesia on Doing of Its Function as Lender of the Last Resort. The task as Lender of Last Resort (LoLR) is embedded in the existence of the central bank's history. LoLR in Indonesia's financial system aims to help banks experiencing liquidity problems and serves to prevent a systemic financial crisis. As a central bank, LoLR cannot be separated with the duties and authority of Bank Indonesia. However, in the execution of LoLR several times policy makers in Bank Indonesia related to the legal case.Therefore, legal protection for officials or policy makers in Bank Indonesia is very important, moreover policy is closely related to discretion regarding the affairs of government will prioritize the achievement of the target objectives (doelmatigheid) rather than the legality of applicable law (rechtsmatigheid).There are two (2) issues examined in this research is how the legal protection arrangements for policymakers in Bank Indonesia and how the legal protection that is given to employees and decision makers with applicable regulations. The research in this thesis is a normative legal research that is descriptive analytical approach by using legislation and regulations as well as analysis of legal concepts. Legal materials consisted of primary legal materials in the form of legislation and regulations, secondary legal materials in the form of literature related to the problems, and tertiary legal materials in the form of legal dictionaries and articles.Form of legal regulation of the legal protection provided for in Article 45 of Law No. 23 of 1999 concerning Bank Indonesia as amended several times, most recently by the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6 of 2009 and Regulation of Bank Indonesia Number 11/10 / PDG / 2009 on Legal Assistance. Legal protection is intended to create a working atmosphere which is conducive to improve the performance of executing official duties of Bank Indonesia in the face of increasingly complex legal problems and develop. The principle of the provision of legal protection is that BI‟s employee or official cannot be punished for the implementation of tasks and authority or for taking the necessary decisions in carrying out its duties and authorities, all done in good faith and in accordance with legislation., This thesis entitled Analysis of Legal Protection for Policy Makers in Bank Indonesia on Doing of Its Function as Lender of the Last Resort. The task as Lender of Last Resort (LoLR) is embedded in the existence of the central bank's history. LoLR in Indonesia's financial system aims to help banks experiencing liquidity problems and serves to prevent a systemic financial crisis. As a central bank, LoLR cannot be separated with the duties and authority of Bank Indonesia. However, in the execution of LoLR several times policy makers in Bank Indonesia related to the legal case.Therefore, legal protection for officials or policy makers in Bank Indonesia is very important, moreover policy is closely related to discretion regarding the affairs of government will prioritize the achievement of the target objectives (doelmatigheid) rather than the legality of applicable law (rechtsmatigheid).There are two (2) issues examined in this research is how the legal protection arrangements for policymakers in Bank Indonesia and how the legal protection that is given to employees and decision makers with applicable regulations. The research in this thesis is a normative legal research that is descriptive analytical approach by using legislation and regulations as well as analysis of legal concepts. Legal materials consisted of primary legal materials in the form of legislation and regulations, secondary legal materials in the form of literature related to the problems, and tertiary legal materials in the form of legal dictionaries and articles.Form of legal regulation of the legal protection provided for in Article 45 of Law No. 23 of 1999 concerning Bank Indonesia as amended several times, most recently by the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6 of 2009 and Regulation of Bank Indonesia Number 11/10 / PDG / 2009 on Legal Assistance. Legal protection is intended to create a working atmosphere which is conducive to improve the performance of executing official duties of Bank Indonesia in the face of increasingly complex legal problems and develop. The principle of the provision of legal protection is that BI‟s employee or official cannot be punished for the implementation of tasks and authority or for taking the necessary decisions in carrying out its duties and authorities, all done in good faith and in accordance with legislation.]"

"Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk menganalisis bentuk perlindungan hukum salah satu APMK yaitu kartu kredit nasabah bank terhadap kejahatan kartu kredit. Adapun permasalahan dalam penelitian ini yaitu: Bagaimanakah ketentuan hukum mengenai kartu kredit di Indonesia dan Bagaimanakah perlindungan hukum terhadap kejahatan kartu kredit nasabah bank di Indonesia. Dengan tingginya peredaran kartu kredit di Indonesia berpotensi terjadinya permasalahan hukum. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penelitian bertujuan untuk melakukan analisis terkait dengan bentuk perlindungan hukum terhadap kejahatan kartu kredit di Indonesia. Adapun jenis penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu legal/yuridis approach dimana akan diteliti terhadap penerapan azas-azas hukum, sistematika hukum yang telah ada, sinkronisasi hukum yang ada di Indonesia terkait kartu kredit dan perlindungan hukum. Berdasarkan analisis yang dilakukan dalam penelitian ini, diperoleh hasil bentuk perlindungan hukum bagi kartu kredit nasabah bank antara lain: perlindungan secara tidak langsung langsung dan perlindungan secara langsung. Perlindungan hukum secara tidak langsung meliputi UU No. 7 tahun 1992 sebagaimana telah diubah dengan UU No. 10 Tahun 1998 Tentang Perbankan, UU No. 8 Tahun 1999 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen, Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, UU No. 11 tahun 2008 sebagaimana telah diubah dengan UU No. 19 Tahun 2016 Tentang Informasi & Transaksi Elektronik. Perlindungan hukum secara langsung antara lain Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor 22/20/PBI/2020 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen Bank Indonesia, Peraturan Bank Indonesia Nomor 22/23/PBI/2020 Tentang Sistem Pembayaran, Peraturan Menteri Komunikasi Dan Informatika Republik Indonesia Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 Tentang Perlindungan Data Pribadi Dalam Sistem Elektronik, Surat Edaran Bank Indonesia Nomor 16/16/DKSP/2014 Tentang Tata Cara Pelaksanaan Perlindungan Konsumen Jasa Sistem Pembayaran.

---

This research was conducted to analysis the form legal protection either APMK, namely credit cards of bank customers against credit card crimes. Now problems in this research: How are the legal provisions regarding credit cards in Indonesia and How are legal protections against credit card crimes bank customers in Indonesia. With the high circulation of credit cards in Indonesia, there is the potential for legal problems. Based on this, the research aims to conduct an analysis related to the form of legal protection against credit card crimes in Indonesia. Type of research used in this study is the legal/juridical approach, which will examine the application of legal principles, existing legal systems, synchronization of existing laws in Indonesia regarding credit cards and legal protection. Based on the analysis conducted in this research, the results obtained from the form of legal protection for bank customer credit cards include: indirect protection and direct protection. Legal protection indirectly includes Law No. 7 of 1992 as amended by Law No. 10 of 1998 concerning Banking, Law No. 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection, the Criminal Code, Law no. 11 of 2008 as amended by Law No. 19 of 2016 concerning Information & Electronic Transactions. Direct legal protection includes Bank Indonesia Regulation Number 22/20/PBI/2020 concerning Bank Indonesia Consumer Protection, Bank Indonesia Regulation Number 22/23/PBI/2020 concerning Payment Systems, Regulation of the Minister of Communications and Information Technology of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 of 2016 concerning Protection of Personal Data in Electronic Systems, Circular Letter of Bank Indonesia Number 16/16/DKSP/2014 concerning Procedures for Implementation of Consumer Protection for Payment System Services."