Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Skripsi ini membahas pembukaan rahasia Kedokteran yang dipergunakan demi kepentingan Hukum dengan melakukan analisis Putusan Nomor 373/Pid.Sus/2017/PN Bnj, Putusan Nomor 453/Pid.Sus/2017/PN Bnj dan Putusan Nomor 69/Pid.Sus/2017/PN Bnj di Pengadilan Negeri Binjai. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif yang menggunakan studi kasus, yaitu Putusan Nomor 373/Pid.Sus/2017/PN BNJ, Putusan Nomor 453/Pid.Sus/2017/PN Bnj dan Putusan Nomor 69/Pid.Sus/2017/PN Bnj. Hasil penelitian mengungkapkan adanya ketidakpastian jaminan dalam hal pembukaan rahasia kedokteran. Adanya aturan yang melarang pembukaan rahasia kedokteran yang menyertakan dengan sanksi pidana apabila dilanggar, namun dipihak lain adanya aturan yang mewajibkan untuk menyimpangi ketentuan rahasia kedokteran. Sehingga perlu adanya suatu kepastian hukum tersendiri terkait dengan ketentuan pembukaan rahasia kedokteran bila dikaitkan dengan kepentingan hukum.

---

This mini thesis discusses the disclosure of medical secrets used for legal purposes by analyzing Decision Number 373 / Pid.Sus / 2017 / PN Bnj, Decision Number 453 / Pid.Sus / 2017 / PN Bnj and Decision Number 69 / Pid.Sus / 2017 / PN Bnj in the Binjai District Court. This research is a normative juridical study using a qualitative approach that uses case studies, namely Decision Number 373 / Pid.Sus / 2017 / PN BNJ, Decision Number 453 / Pid.Sus / 2017 / PN Bnj and Decision Number 69 / Pid.Sus / 2017 / PN Bnj . The results of the study revealed the existence of uncertainty of collateral in terms of disclosing medical secrets. There are rules that prohibit the disclosure of medical secrets that include criminal sanctions if violated, but on the other hand there are rules that require to deviate the provisions of medical secrets. So there needs to be a separate legal certainty related to the provision of disclosing medical secrets when related to legal interests."

"This collection of rich, empirically grounded case studies investigates the conditions and consequences of ?juridification? - the use of law by ordinary individuals as a form of protest against ?the state?. Starting from the actual practices of claimants, these case studies address the translation and interpretation of legal norms into local concepts, actions and practices in a way that highlights the social and cultural dynamism and multivocality of communities in their interaction with the law and legal norms. The contributors to this volume challenge the image of homogeneous and primordially norm-bound cultures that has been (unintentionally) perpetuated by some of the more prevalent treatments of law and culture. This volume highlights the heterogeneous geography of law and the ways boundaries between different legal bodies are transcended in struggles for rights. Contributions include case studies from South Africa, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Turkey, India, Papua New Guinea, Suriname, the Marshall Islands and Russia"

"In the mid-1970s, a group of politically conservative lawyers formed a network of nonprofit, public-interest law firms and began to challenge liberal government in the courts. These attorneys tried to defend property rights, commercial use of public lands, federalism, and economic freedom by litigating cases in law. Then, during the 1980s, they worked on similar legal and policy issues within the administration of President Ronald Reagan. This book explains why conservatives expended so much political and financial capital battling the regulatory state, especially on questions of environmental protection and preservation. It explains the importance of the American West to the development of modern US conservatism. And it explains how some of the key accomplishments of the civil rights movement were reinterpreted and appropriated by the libertarian right."