Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini membahas tentang politik hukum dalam upaya kriminalisasi beragam jenis substansi berbahaya. Peneliti mengaitkan antara kerangka teori kebijakan kriminal dengan politik hukum dalam melihat kebijakan penanggulangan penyalahgunaan substansi berbahaya. Dengan menggunakan teknik pengumpulan data primer, peneliti mewawancarai sejumlah pihak yang paham dan terlibat dalam proses pembentukan kebijakan, seperti Kementerian Kesehatan, Badan Pengawas Obat dan Makanan, Badan Narkotika Nasional, dan Polri. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah peneliti melihat adanya keterkaitan antara politik hukum dengan penetapan kebijakan kriminal melalui pembentukan Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 13 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Penggolongan Narkotika. Tidak hanya itu, perbedaan respon Pemerintah dalam upaya kriminalisasi substansi berbahaya pun tercermin dalam kebijakan kriminal yang diterapkan.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis discusses the legal policy to criminalize many kinds of hazardous substances. Researcher used criminal policy and legal policy as a theoretical framework to see eradication of dangerous substances abuse policy. By using primary data collection techniques, the researcher interviewed several informants who understand and involved in forming the policies, such as Indonesia Ministry of Health Republic of Indonesia (Kementerian Kesehatan RI), National Narcotics Board (BNN), National Agency for Drug and Food Control (BPOM), and Indonesia National Police (Polri).The results showed that there was a relationship between the politics of law and criminal policy through the establishment of Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 13 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Penggolongan Narkotika. Moreover the difference of the government responses to criminalize any hazardous substances also seen in the criminal policy applied."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai peraturan hukum positif Indonesia dan peraturan internasional yang mengatur tentang limbah Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun (B3) serta permasalahan penegakan hukum lingkungan terhadap pencemaran yang disebabkan oleh limbah B3. Penelitian yuridis normatif digunakan dalam pembahasan skripsi ini dengan menggunakan data sekunder melalui studi kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa penegakan hukum lingkungan terhadap limbah B3 dapat dilakukan dengan penegakan hukum secara administratif, perdata dan pidana. Penegakan hukum secara pidana terhadap limbah B3 adalah penegakan hukum yang utama (premium remedium). Namun demikian, hal tersebut tidak menutup kemungkinan untuk melakukan penegakan hukum secara bersamaan dengan dua penegakan hukum lainnya.

---

This thesis discussing about Indonesia and international law regarding to poisonous and hazardous waste as well as the environmental law enforcement issues for the pollution caused by the poisonous and hazardous waste. Normative and juridical study are used in this thesis with the secondary data through the literature research. The result shows that the environmental law enforcement to poisonous and hazardous waste can be conducted through the administrative, criminal, and private law. Criminal law enforcement to poisonous and hazardous waste is the main (premium remedium). However, it is possible to use criminal law simultaneously with the administrative and private law."

"Respon hukum pidana diperlukan apabila terjadi pertemuan (konvergensi) antara kepentingan umum dengan penggunaan komputer dimana kepentingan umum tersebut terganggu dengan pengoperasian tertentu dari komputer. Saat ini belum terdapat aturan yang memadai untuk menjerat pelaku kejahatan komputer maka Indonesia melakukan pembaharuan hukum pidana yang nampak di dalam Rancangan Undang-undang Hukum Pidana. R KUHP tahun 2005 telah memuat kriminalisasi mengenai tindak pidana informatika. Ketentuan ini diatur dalam bagian tersendiri. Terhadap perbuatan tersebut terdapat beberapa pasal yang dapat digunakan untuk menjerat pelaku dengan ancaman hukuman yang berbeda sehingga dapat menimbulkan akibat negatif yaitu tidak adanya kepastian hukum. Motif pelaku pads kasus-kasus kejahatan komputer tidak banyak berubah namun modus operandi pelaku akan berkembang seiring dengan perkembangan teknologi dan penyesuaian pelaku terhadap kondisi yang ada.

---

Criminal law response is needed because its convergent occurs between public interest with computer users whereas the said public interest is bothered by the special operation of the computer. At this present there are not any appropriate regulations to catch up the criminal doers of computers, hence Indonesia conducts reformation of criminal law that can be seen in the Device of Criminal Law (R KUHP). R KUHP year of 2005 has made criminalization of the infonnation criminal action. This stipulation is arranged in part five subject the information and telemetric criminal actions. But for the aforesaid actions there are some articles that can be used to catch up the doer with the difference action treatment. By the existence of the differences in the aforesaid articles treatment can cause negative effect that is there is no certainty of law to the action done by the offender. Beside that the offender motivation in the computer criminal cases do not change much but the offender's way to do will develop in accordance to technology development and the adjustment of the doer to the existing condition."

"Skripsi ini membahas perlindungan hukum bagi whistleblower tindak pidana korupsi dalam perundang-undangan di Indonesia dan praktik perlindungan hukum bagi whistleblower tindak pidana korupsi atas risiko kriminalisasi balik dalam beberapa perkara di Indonesia dengan studi kasus yakni Nurhayati dan Roni Wijaya. Penulisan skripsi ini dengan metode yuridis normative dengan bentuk deskriptif analitis. Dilatarbelakangi dengan permasalahan korupsi yang terus menjadi permasalahan di masyarakat. Dalam melakukan pengungkapan atas tindak pidana korupsi terdapat beberapa cara untuk mengungkapkannya, salah satunya dengan sebagai Whistleblower. Pasal 33 UNCAC mengatur bahwa negara memiliki kewajiban untuk mempertimbangkan perlindungan bagi whistleblower kedalam sistem hukum nasional negaranya. Indonesia mengatur perlindungan saksi dan korban dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2006 tetapi tidak memberikan perlindungan hukum yang kuat bagi Whistleblower. Terbitnya SEMA 4/11 yang diharapkan dapat mengatur Whistleblower, ternyata tidak memiliki nilai tambah mengenai perlindungan bagi Whistleblower. Perlindungan bagi Whistleblower disamakan dengan perlindungan bagi pelapor umumnya. Penggunaan istilah Whistleblower pun masih berbeda dalam setiap kasusnya yang mendorong kepada bentuk perlindungan kepada Whistleblower yang belum jelas. Padahal Whistleblower menghadapi banyak risiko yang dikenakan terhadap dirinya. Risiko yang terbesar adalah adanya kriminalisasi balik berupa dilaporkannya kembali atas tindak pidana lainnya terhadap dirinya. Ketiadaan perlindungan hukum yang khusus terhadap whistleblower dari risiko terhadap kriminalisasi balik akan mengurangi potensi publik untuk menjadi whistleblower. Perlindungan paling minim dari risiko kriminalisasi balik yang dapat terjadi bagi whistleblower yang tertera di Pasal 10 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2006 serta pada poin 8b SEMA Nomor 4 Tahun 2011 dalam praktiknya tidak dilaksanakan sesuai dengan rumusan. Padahal peran Whistleblower merupakan peran penting untuk mengawali pengungkapan atas kasus korupsi yang membawa pada kerugian negara. Diperlukannya perlindungan yang lebih bagi seorang whistleblower dengan diatur lebih lanjut dalam penguatan ketentuan mengenai perlindungan khusus bagi whistleblower terutama terhadap risiko kriminalisasi balik dalam bentuk ketentuan perundang-undangan.

---

This thesis will examine legal protection towards whistleblowers on corruption in Indonesia domestic law and the application of legal protection towards whistleblowers in corruption in the risks of reverse-criminalization in several cases in Indonesia with a case study of Nurhayati and Roni Wijaya. The method used in this thesis is a normative juridical approach with a specification in the form of descriptive analysis. Corruption, which has become an endless issue, happens to be one of the backgrounds of this thesis. There are numerous kinds of effective endeavours in order to disclose the corruption and one of those is to become a whistleblower. Article 33 of UNCAC regulates that each state party shall contemplate the protection of whistleblowers in their domestic law. In Indonesia, witness and victim protection is regulated in Act No. 13 of 2006 yet it is not powerful enough to give a legal protection towards the whistleblower. The publication of Supreme Court Circular of The Republic of Indonesia number 4 of 2011 which expected to be able to regulate whistleblowers, failed to give more value in protecting the whistleblower. It turns out that the protection of the whistleblower is being generalized with the protection of the regular informant. The use of the word “whistleblower” is still not consistent in each case. Thus, the protection of whistleblowers remains unclear. Moreover, the risks faced by the whistleblower are countless. The massive risk that could occur is reverse-criminalization such as being reported for another criminal offense towards the whistleblower. The absence of special legal protection towards whistleblowers and moreover about the protection from the risks of reverse-criminalization, with no hesitation will reduce the public potency to become the whistleblower. The slight protection from the risks of reverse-criminalization that could occur to the whistleblower is regulated in Article 10 Section (1) Act No.13 of 2006 and written in 8b point of Supreme Court Circular of The Republic of Indonesia number 4 of 2011. But it has not applied yet as it’s expected to be. Whereas, the role of whistleblower is essential to begin the disclosure of the corruption which is causing disservice to the country. An advance protection towards whistleblower is needed to be regulated any further in the regulation reinforcement in the form of statutory provisions as a special protection towards whistleblower especially in the risk of reverse criminalization."

"Business Judgement Rule merupakan aturan yang memberikan kekebalan atau perlindungan bagi manajemen perseroan dari setiap tanggung jawab yang lahir sebagai akibat dari transaksi atau kegiatan yang dilakukan olehnya sesuai dengan batas-batas kewenangan dan kekuasaan yang diberikan kepadanya, dengan pertimbangan bahwa kegiatan tersebut telah dilakukan dengan memperhatikan standar kehati-hatian dan itikad baik. Prinsip Businnes Judgment Rule secara implisit diakomodir di dalam Pasal 92 dan Pasal 97 Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas yang bertujuan agar melindungi direksi dari upaya kriminalisasi, sehingga asas kepastian hukum terpenuhi.Seharusnya para penegak hukum dapat memilah penyebab yang terjadi dalam kerugian sebuah Badan Usaha Milik Negara. Apabila terjadi kerugian negara yang timbul dalam sebuah Badan Usaha Milik Negara, itu merupakan murni dari resiko bisnis itu sendiri, yang keputusannya diambil yaitu dengan prinsip kehati-hatian dan itikad baik, menurut Penulis, seharusnya dalam penyelesainnya dapat menggunakan prinsip Business Judgment Rule dan dapat dikatakan bukan sebagai suatu tindak pidana korupsi. Hal tersebut terjadi pada kasus perkara Hotasi Nababan, Mantan Direktur Utama PT Merpati Nusantara Airline.Hasil penelitian bentuk pertanggungjawaban direksi dalam perseroan terbatas berdasarkan prinsip business judgement rule adalah pertanggungjawaban baik perdata yang telah diatur dalam Pasal 97 ayat 3 dan 4 Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas, serta Pasal 1365 KUHPerdata, maupun pertanggungjawaban pidana yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 jo Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi.

---

Business Judgement Rule is a rule which provides immunity or protection for the management of the company from any responsibility that is born as a result of a transaction or activity undertaken by him in accordance with the limits of authority and power given to him, considering that these activities have been conducted with respect to the standards prudence and good faith. Judgment Rule Businnes principle implicitly accommodated in Article 92 and Article 97 of Law Number 40 Year 2007 regarding Limited Liability Company which aims to protect the directors of the attempt to criminalize, so the principle of legal certainty is met.Supposedly law enforcement officials can sort out the cause of the losses occurring in a State Owned Enterprises. In the event of losses that arise in a State Owned Enterprises, it is purely from the business risk itself, the decision was taken on the principle of prudence and in good faith, according to the author, it should in its solution can make use of Business Judgment Rule and it can be said not as an act of corruption. This happens in the case of case Hotasi Nababan, former Director of PT Merpati Nusantara Airline.The results of the study form of accountability of directors in a limited liability company based on the principles of the business judgment rule is accountable to both civil set out in Article 97 paragraph 3 and 4 of Law Number 40 Year 2007 regarding Limited Liability Company, as well as Article 1365 of the Civil Code, as well as criminal liability regulated in Law Number 20 Year 2001 jo Law No. 31 of 1999 on Corruption Eradication."

"[ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas kebijakan Aparatur Negara dalam dugaan tindakpidana korupsi. Dengan mengkaji konsep dan kewenangan kebijakan Aparatur Negara dalam Hukum Administrasi dan Hukum pidana. Kebijakan tersebut dinilai dari kedua pendekatan ilmu hukum tersebut untuk menilai kebijakan Aparatur yang bagaimana dapat dikriminalisasikan sebagai tindak pidana korupsi. Dalam tesis ini yang ingin didapatkan oleh penulis adalah (1) Apakah suatu kebijakanAparatur Negara yang melanggar ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan dapat dimungkinkan untuk dikenakan sanksi pidana; (2) Bagaimana terhadap suatu kebijakan Aparatur Negara yang di dalamnya mengandung unsur perbuatan melawan hukum atau unsur penyalahgunaan wewenang dalam tindak pidana korupsi; (3) Apakah terhadap kebijakan yang dikeluarkan oleh Aparatur Negara yang memberikan keuntungan kepada orang lain atau korporasi dan menimbulkan kerugian negara dapat dikenakan tindak pidana korupsi sedangkan dia tidak ada menikmati hasil tindakannya. Penelitian ini mengunakan metode penelitian dengan pendekatan yuridis normatif dengan mengunakan data sekunder seperti dari buku-buku dan peraturan perundang-undangan yang terkait dengan tindak pidana korupsi, kerugian negara, penyalahgunaan wewenag dan literatur-literatur terkait lainnya. Kebijakan Aparatur Negara harus berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan. Seorang pejabat dilarang melakukan penyalahgunaan wewenang yang melanggar ketentuan perundang-undangan. Namun disisi lain pejabat juga diberikan hak kebebasan dalam mengambil kebijakan untuk kepentingan orang banyak bahkan kalaupun undang-undang tidak mengaturnya dapat diterapkan berdasarkan AAUPB. Namun apabila kebijakan tersebut ada unsur mens rea (niat jahat) dan dilakukan dengan sengaja maka kebijakanAparatur Negara tersebut dapat diminta pertanggungjawab pribadi bukan jabatan atas perbuatannya tersebut. Kalau perbuatan itu tidak ada unsur mens rea maka masuk kedalam ranah hukum administrasi atau hukum perdata. Pada saat ini kebijakan Aparatur Negara telah masuk dalam kategori kriminalisasi. Hal ini terjadi karena adanya kesalahan dalam pemahaman dimana kerugian negara ditempat sebagai bukti utama telah terjadi korupsi atas perbuatannya yangmelawan hukum atau menyalahgunakan wewenang tanpa diikuti adanya unsur koruptif. Padahal dalam banyak kasus kerugian negara ini terjadi karena adanya kesalahan administratif atau kecurangan dari pihak pemenang tender yang memanipulasi barang dan data sehingga tidak sesuai spesifikasi yang mana dokumen tersebut dipalsukan dan dibuat seolah-olah sah dan legal. Oleh karenanya, dengan lahirnya Undang-Undang No. 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Negara diharapkan dapat memberikan perlindungan akan kriminalisasi terhadap putusan dan/atau tindakan Aparatur Negara yang didalamnya tidak ada unsur koruptifnya.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis examines the policy of the State Apparatus in alleged corruption. To examines the concept and authority policy of the State Apparatus in Administrative Law and Criminal Law. The such policy is assessed from two approach the science of law to assessing how policies Apparatus which can becriminalized as an act of corruption. In this thesis that want achieved by the author are (1) Does a State Apparatus policies that violate the provisions of the legislation can be subject to criminal sanctions; (2) When is a policy of the State Apparatus can be regarded fulfill the elements of tort or elements of abuse of power in corruption; (3) A State Apparatus policies that provide benefits to another person or corporation and causing state losses while he did not get to enjoy the results of his conduct, whether such conduct may be subject tocorruption. This research uses research methods with normative juridical approach by using secondary data as the basis for this research as from books and legislation relating to corruption, state losses, abuse of power and other related literature and also supported by directly interviews to some of prosecutor in corruption. State Apparatus policy should be based law and legislation. A government official is prohibited do abuse of power that violate the statutoryprovisions. On the other hand the government official also granted the right of freedom in making decisions for the public good even if the law does not yet set such, the government official can make policy based on the Good Governance Principles. However, if the such policy has element of mens rea (malice) and there is deliberate and realized then the policies of the State Apparatus may be subject to responsibility in corruption. If the conduct did not have element mens rea thenhis conduct entered into the administrative law or civil law. At this time the policy of the State Apparatus has been included in the category of criminalization in corruption. This occurs because of an error in understanding where state losses in place as the primary evidence of corruption has occurred for his conduct against the law or abuse of power while his conduct without being followed by the corrupt elements. Therefore, there are cases of state losses caused toadministrative error or fraud, or because of defective juridical. To publication of Law No. 30 Year 2014 on the State Administration as a form protection to the criminalization of the decision and / or conduct of State Apparatus in which there is no element of corruptive;This thesis examines the policy of the State Apparatus in alleged corruption. Toexamines the concept and authority policy of the State Apparatus inAdministrative Law and Criminal Law. The such policy is assessed from twoapproach the science of law to assessing how policies Apparatus which can becriminalized as an act of corruption. In this thesis that want achieved by the authorare (1) Does a State Apparatus policies that violate the provisions of thelegislation can be subject to criminal sanctions; (2) When is a policy of the StateApparatus can be regarded fulfill the elements of tort or elements of abuse ofpower in corruption; (3) A State Apparatus policies that provide benefits toanother person or corporation and causing state losses while he did not get toenjoy the results of his conduct, whether such conduct may be subject tocorruption. This research uses research methods with normative juridical approachby using secondary data as the basis for this research as from books andlegislation relating to corruption, state losses, abuse of power and other relatedliterature and also supported by directly interviews to some of prosecutor incorruption. State Apparatus policy should be based law and legislation. Agovernment official is prohibited do abuse of power that violate the statutoryprovisions. On the other hand the government official also granted the right offreedom in making decisions for the public good even if the law does not yet setsuch, the government official can make policy based on the Good GovernancePrinciples. However, if the such policy has element of mens rea (malice) and thereis deliberate and realized then the policies of the State Apparatus may be subjectto responsibility in corruption. If the conduct did not have element mens rea thenhis conduct entered into the administrative law or civil law. At this time the policyof the State Apparatus has been included in the category of criminalization incorruption. This occurs because of an error in understanding where state losses inplace as the primary evidence of corruption has occurred for his conduct againstthe law or abuse of power while his conduct without being followed by thecorrupt elements. Therefore, there are cases of state losses caused toadministrative error or fraud, or because of defective juridical. To publication ofLaw No. 30 Year 2014 on the State Administration as a form protection to thecriminalization of the decision and / or conduct of State Apparatus in which thereis no element of corruptive;This thesis examines the policy of the State Apparatus in alleged corruption. Toexamines the concept and authority policy of the State Apparatus inAdministrative Law and Criminal Law. The such policy is assessed from twoapproach the science of law to assessing how policies Apparatus which can becriminalized as an act of corruption. In this thesis that want achieved by the authorare (1) Does a State Apparatus policies that violate the provisions of thelegislation can be subject to criminal sanctions; (2) When is a policy of the StateApparatus can be regarded fulfill the elements of tort or elements of abuse ofpower in corruption; (3) A State Apparatus policies that provide benefits toanother person or corporation and causing state losses while he did not get toenjoy the results of his conduct, whether such conduct may be subject tocorruption. This research uses research methods with normative juridical approachby using secondary data as the basis for this research as from books andlegislation relating to corruption, state losses, abuse of power and other relatedliterature and also supported by directly interviews to some of prosecutor incorruption. State Apparatus policy should be based law and legislation. Agovernment official is prohibited do abuse of power that violate the statutoryprovisions. On the other hand the government official also granted the right offreedom in making decisions for the public good even if the law does not yet setsuch, the government official can make policy based on the Good GovernancePrinciples. However, if the such policy has element of mens rea (malice) and thereis deliberate and realized then the policies of the State Apparatus may be subjectto responsibility in corruption. If the conduct did not have element mens rea thenhis conduct entered into the administrative law or civil law. At this time the policyof the State Apparatus has been included in the category of criminalization incorruption. This occurs because of an error in understanding where state losses inplace as the primary evidence of corruption has occurred for his conduct againstthe law or abuse of power while his conduct without being followed by thecorrupt elements. Therefore, there are cases of state losses caused toadministrative error or fraud, or because of defective juridical. To publication ofLaw No. 30 Year 2014 on the State Administration as a form protection to thecriminalization of the decision and / or conduct of State Apparatus in which thereis no element of corruptive, This thesis examines the policy of the State Apparatus in alleged corruption. Toexamines the concept and authority policy of the State Apparatus inAdministrative Law and Criminal Law. The such policy is assessed from twoapproach the science of law to assessing how policies Apparatus which can becriminalized as an act of corruption. In this thesis that want achieved by the authorare (1) Does a State Apparatus policies that violate the provisions of thelegislation can be subject to criminal sanctions; (2) When is a policy of the StateApparatus can be regarded fulfill the elements of tort or elements of abuse ofpower in corruption; (3) A State Apparatus policies that provide benefits toanother person or corporation and causing state losses while he did not get toenjoy the results of his conduct, whether such conduct may be subject tocorruption. This research uses research methods with normative juridical approachby using secondary data as the basis for this research as from books andlegislation relating to corruption, state losses, abuse of power and other relatedliterature and also supported by directly interviews to some of prosecutor incorruption. State Apparatus policy should be based law and legislation. Agovernment official is prohibited do abuse of power that violate the statutoryprovisions. On the other hand the government official also granted the right offreedom in making decisions for the public good even if the law does not yet setsuch, the government official can make policy based on the Good GovernancePrinciples. However, if the such policy has element of mens rea (malice) and thereis deliberate and realized then the policies of the State Apparatus may be subjectto responsibility in corruption. If the conduct did not have element mens rea thenhis conduct entered into the administrative law or civil law. At this time the policyof the State Apparatus has been included in the category of criminalization incorruption. This occurs because of an error in understanding where state losses inplace as the primary evidence of corruption has occurred for his conduct againstthe law or abuse of power while his conduct without being followed by thecorrupt elements. Therefore, there are cases of state losses caused toadministrative error or fraud, or because of defective juridical. To publication ofLaw No. 30 Year 2014 on the State Administration as a form protection to thecriminalization of the decision and / or conduct of State Apparatus in which thereis no element of corruptive]"

"ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas mengenai bagaimana suatu kebijakan yang dibuat oleh PejabatAdministrasi Pemerintahan dapat dikenai sanksi pidana. Penelitian ini merupakanpenelitian kualitatif dengan pendekatan yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitianmenyarankan agar segera disahkannya Rancangan Undang-Undang AdministrasiPemerintahan. Dengan disahkannya Rancangan Undang-Undang AdministrasiPemerintahan, jika pejabat administrasi pemerintahan melakukan suatu kesalahanatau pelanggaran, dapat dengan mudah dilihat apakah hal tersebut merupakan suatupelanggaran administrasi atau pelanggaran hukum sehingga tidak ada lagi pejabatyang kebal hukum. Adanya sanksi pidana bagi pejabat administrasi pemerintahanyang menyalahgunakan wewenangnya dalam mengambil suatu kebijakan, diharapkandapat membuat pejabat administrasi pemerintahan selalu menggunakan segenapkemampuan intelektual dan keahliannya serta mengedepankan prinsip kehati-hatiansecara obyektif dan tanggung jawab dalam mengambil suatu kebijakan.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis examines how a policy made by Governance Administration Officialcould be subject to criminal sanctions. This study is a qualitative research withnormative juridical approach. The results of the study suggest that the Bill ofGovernance Administration should pass immediately. With the law, if the governanceadministration officials happen to make a mistake or violate the law, it is easy todefine whether it is an administrative or law violation, so there will be no moreofficials are above the law. The criminal sanctions for governance administrationofficials, who abuse their authority in making a policy, is expected to make themalways use all their intellectual abilities and expertise as well as to put forwardprudential principle objectively and responsibly."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai pengalaman seorang perempuan bernama Maria, berusia 21 tahun, sebagai perempuan yang mengalami dominasi laki-laki sebagai bentuk empiris struktur patriarki yang kemudian menghasilkan isu moral di dalam masyarakat bahwa aborsi merupakan tindakan pembunuhan anak yang tidak boleh dilakukan oleh perempuan serta mengakibatkan perempuan pelaku aborsi mengalami kriminalisasi. Penelitian ini ditulis dengan menggunakan perspektif feminis kriminologi (feminis radikal, etika feminis, dan hukum feminis), penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan tipe penelitian studi kasus feminis yang memungkinkan peneliti untuk mengetengahkan pengalaman perempuan di dalam isu aborsi. Pada akhirnya, penelitian ini menemukan bahwa kriminalisasi terhadap Maria (perempuan pelaku aborsi) adalah sebuah kejahatan karena telah memberikan penindasan bagi otonomi tubuh perempuan dimana hak kesehatan reproduksi dan seksual perempuan tidak dihormati.

---

This minithesis discusses the experienced of a woman named Maria, aged 21 years, as a women who experienced male dominance as a form of empirical patriarchal structure which then generates moral issues in society that abortion is an act of child murder that should not be done by women and lead women criminalizing abortion experience. This study was authored by using feminist perspectives in criminology (radical feminist, feminist ethics, and feminist law), this study used a qualitative approach to the type of feminist case study that allows researchers to present the experience of women in the abortion issue. In the end, this study found that the criminalization of Maria (women abortion) is a crime because it has provided for the suppression of women's autonomy body where sexual and reproductive health rights of women are not respected."

"Dewasa ini masyarakat menaruh perhatian yang lebih kepada kebijakan dan tingkah laku pejabat publik terlebih dalam masalah korupsi, kolusi dan nepotisme (KKN). Notaris sebagai pejabat publik tentunya tidak lepas dari perhatian masyarakat dalam hal permasalahan KKN. Pada saat ini terdapat beberapa kasus Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Indonesia yang dianggap melibatkan Notaris. Hal tersebut menyebabkan proses kriminalisasi terhadap profesi Notaris tersebut. Proses Kriminalisasi terhadap Notaris itu sendiri pastinya dianggap sangat merugikan Notaris bila ia telah menjalankan jabatannya dengan sangat berhati-hati dan sesuai dengan ketentuan UUJN dan Kode Etik Notaris.Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk meneliti apakah penentuan tarif pengurusan akta oleh notaris dalam kasus ini telah sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku dan bagaimana perlindungan hukum bagi notaris yang menjalankan jabatannya terhadap suatu kasus tindak pidana korupsi.Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode pendekatan yuridis normative dan penarikan kesimpulannya bersifat deskriptid analitis. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah penentuan tarif yang dilakukan oleh Notaris dalam kasus ini tidak sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku dan tidak terdapat suatu perlindungan hukum yang diatur khusus bagi notaris dalam menjalankan jabatannya.

---

Today people pay more attention to the policy and behavior of public officials especially on the issue of corruption, collusion and nepotism. Notaries as public officials must not be separated from the public's attention in terms of corruption problems. At the moment there are several cases of Corruption in Indonesia were considered to involve a Notary. This led to the criminalization of the Notary profession. The criminalization of the Notary process itself must be considered very detrimental to the Notary when he has run his position very carefully and in accordance with the provisions of the Code UUJN and Notary.This study aimed to examine whether the determination of the maintenance rates by a notary deed in this case in accordance with the legislation in force and how the legal protection for a notary who runs the office for a case of corruption.The method used in this research is a normative juridical approach and withdrawal are descriptive analytical conclusions. The conclusion from this study is the determination of tariffs performed by a Notary in this case is not in accordance with the legislation in force and there is a special set of legal protection for a notary in the running position."