Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"In its development of the last three years, there has been a new phenomenon in Indonesia jurisdiction; i.e. public claims made using a class action procedure. The utilization of such a procedure has been made so frequently and obtained legal forces because it has got us opportunity and justification in a variety of Indonesian legislations; among other things: law no. 23, 1997 concerning environmental management, law no. 8, 1999 regarding consumer protection and law no. 41 governing forestry followed up by a litigation procedure through the supreme court?s regulation no. 1, 2002. such a regulation has bridged the concept and legal theory which is subsequently used to execute .civil dalm procedures since there has been a shift from using an individual model to using a representative one. before the supreme court issued this regulation, courts had always' rejected collective claims on the ground that Indonesias civil law, especially section 123 of hir, a revised indonesia's law, stated that such claims could be brought up their claimants or by hiring Iavvyers. without a special authorization, however, lawyers could not represent class interest to be in session of court now, on the basis of article 4 of supreme court regulation to represent a ciass interest, the representative is not required to have this special authorization from the group he represents. social groups having the some case shoulclnot bring their case individually to prevent a recurrent case from happening. this oollective claim, class action, can be made at a lower cost so that the general public may bring their claims to court. in addition, to void mutually controversial verdicts, when each individual make his own claim, class action constitutes to be a more effident procedure. class action as a litigation procedure has its historical, social and cultural background in the common law system. therefore, class action as an effort of civil law reform in Indonesia has a tendency toward the civil law system; from legal comparison viewpoint, lt requires brillian thoughts on the part of judges in order to implement the existing laws actively; let alone, when we consider that the supreme court regulation no. 1, 2002 is but a way of transferring on America or Australian model. on the other hand, class action as a legal protection over Indonesian communities can be exercised as a social control; i.e. as social norms against deviant behaviours and their effects that include prohibitions, demands, condemnation and compensation. dispude resolution procedures with regard to compensation over unlawful deeds in class action should be prepared in detail, covering mechanism of its distribution for all members of a class including suggestions on court proving or panel to help distribute compensation more smoothly. when a compensation demand is approved, a judge isobliged to decide in detail the class grouping, compensation distribution mechanism`and steps to be taken by class representatives such as the obligation of notification. among the frequent cases are environmental function recovery, waste management improvement, pollution source eradication, compensation for the affected group and attitudinal changes among law breakers.Besides, class action as a tool of social engineering, that is, when a gap between law and social change appears, should find its solution whereas class action as a social emancipation means the equal right among various aspects of social life.based on the fact that court decision in class action is binding to all, any interest group using this procedure should help reduce administrative problems. this new phenomenon in Indonesia jurisdiction, public claims using a class action procedure, ls relevant to Frederick Calvert's theory. the people?s interest represented by a class action is in accordance with the theoiy of utilitarianism proposed by Jeremy Bentham. judges, accordingly, should make their decision on the basis of equilibrium principle between individual and collective interests as put forward by John Rawls In his theory of justice. rules are then needed to avoid a conflict of interests, between individual and collective ones. law as an umpire is indispensable."

"ABSTRAKin its development of the last three years, there has been a new phenomenon in Indonesia jurisdiction; i.e. public claims made using a class action procedure. The utilization of such a procedure has been made so frequently and obtained legal forces because it has got us opportunity and justification in a variety of Indonesian legislations; among other things: law no. 23, 1997 concerning environmental management, law no. 8, 1999 regarding consumer protection and law no. 41 governing forestry followed up by a litigation procedure through the supreme court?s regulation no. 1, 2002. such a regulation has bridged the concept and legal theory which is subsequently used to execute .civil dalm procedures since there has been a shift from using an individual model to using a representative one. before the supreme court issued this regulation, courts had always' rejected collective claims on the ground that Indonesias civil law, especially section 123 of hir, a revised indonesia's law, stated that such claims could be brought up their claimants or by hiring Iavvyers. without a special authorization, however, lawyers could not represent class interest to be in session of court now, on the basis of article 4 of supreme court regulation to represent a ciass interest, the representative is not required to have this special authorization from the group he represents. social groups having the some case shoulclnot bring their case individually to prevent a recurrent case from happening. this oollective claim, class action, can be made at a lower cost so that the general public may bring their claims to court. in addition, to void mutually controversial verdicts, when each individual make his own claim, class action constitutes to be a more effident procedure. class action as a litigation procedure has its historical, social and cultural background in the common law system. therefore, class action as an effort of civil law reform in Indonesia has a tendency toward the civil law system; from legal comparison viewpoint, lt requires brillian thoughts on the part of judges in order to implement the existing laws actively; let alone, when we consider that the supreme court regulation no. 1, 2002 is but a way of transferring on America or Australian model. on the other hand, class action as a legal protection over Indonesian communities can be exercised as a social control; i.e. as social norms against deviant behaviours and their effects that include prohibitions, demands, condemnation and compensation. dispude resolution procedures with regard to compensation over unlawful deeds in class action should be prepared in detail, covering mechanism of its distribution for all members of a class including suggestions on court proving or panel to help distribute compensation more smoothly. when a compensation demand is approved, a judge isobliged to decide in detail the class grouping, compensation distribution mechanism`and steps to be taken by class representatives such as the obligation of notification. among the frequent cases are environmental function recovery, waste management improvement, pollution source eradication, compensation for the affected group and attitudinal changes among law breakers.besides, class action as a tool of social engineering, that is, when a gap between law and social change appears, should find its solution whereas class action as a social emancipation means the equal right among various aspects of social life.based on the fact that court decision in class action is binding to all, any interest group using this procedure should help reduce administrative problems. this new phenomenon in Indonesia jurisdiction, public claims using a class action procedure, ls relevant to Frederick Calvert's theory. the people?s interest represented by a class action is in accordance with the theoiy of utilitarianism proposed by Jeremy Bentham. judges, accordingly, should make their decision on the basis of equilibrium principle between individual and collective interests as put forward by John Rawls In his theory of justice. rules are then needed to avoid a conflict of interests, between individual and collective ones. law as an umpire is indispensable."

"Keberadaan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung No. 1 tahun 2002 adalah untuk mengatur prosedur acara dalam gugatan perwakilan kelompok. Gugatan ini merupakan produk hukum baru di Indonesia. Peraturan yang diberlakukan pada tanggal 26 April 2002, dibuat untuk mengisi kekosongan hukum dalam melakukan prosedur gugatan kelompok, walaupun sebelumnya sudah ada 3 undang-undang, yaitu Undang-undang Pengelolaan lingkungan Hidup, Undang-undang Perlindungan Konsumen dan undang-undang Kehutanan yang memberikan peluang dilakukannya gugatan kelompok. Walaupun demikian masih ada permasalahan yang timbul berkaitan dengan dikeluarkannya peraturan ini, yaitu mengapa gugatan perwakilan kelompok yang diajukan oleh para pihak yang merasa dirugikan ada yang ditolak oleh pengadilan?; Apakah gugatan perwakilan kelompok ini sama dengan hak gugat LSM (Legal standing?; dan bisakah gugatan kelompok ini diajukan ke pengadilan tata usaha negara (PTUN)?. Tiga permasalahan ini yang akan dibahas oleh penulis dalam skripsi ini, sedangkan metodologi yang digunakan dalam penulisan skripsi ini adalah penelitian hukum secara normatif dengan menggunakan data sekunder atau bahan-bahan pustaka dan bentuknya adalah penelitian preskriptif yaitu penelitian yang ditujukan untuk mendapat saran-saran tentang apa yang harus dilakukan untuk mengatasi masalah-masalah. Agar dalam prakteknya berjalan sesuai dengan apa yang diamanatkan dalam peraturannya, maka perlu adanya pemahaman yang mendalam dan sosialisasi bagi pihak-pihak yang terkait antara lain hakim, jaksa, pengacara dan pihak yang dirugikan terhadap keberadaan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung ini, sehingga tidak ada lagi gugatan yang ditolak oleh pengadilan karena tidak memenuhi syarat dalam mengajukan gugatan perwakilan kelompok. Dengan adanya Perma No. 1 tahun 2002 ini diharapkan dapat memberi harapan baru bagi masyarakat dalam menggapai keadilan."

"the class action is a new dimention of the civil procedure in Indonesia has been provided just in Human Environmental act (UU No.23 tahun 1997) to settle environmental suit action where numerous persons or society are participated therein. Class action has not been provided et in the other legislation out side of human environmental act (UU No.23 tahun 1997). That fact has been taken as a consideration by judge of pengadilan negeri of south jakarta not to accept the class action suit procedure that bought by YLKI againts PLN as defendant in consumers suit action. that judgement may raise a question wether the judge could not accept that class action procedure by doing the "law making".That question could be answered by making an analysis to the possibility of accepting class action procedure in another suit action out side of environmental suit action, based on the "law making" methode.By making that analysis, it has given the result that , Theoritically the judge could accept class action procedure in another suit action out sde of environmental suit action by "law making" based on analogical methode, futurity interpretation methode or another methode that has been known in the "law making". The acceptence of class action procedure in another suit action out side of environmental suit action not only give a contribution for the law development, but also give protection for human interest. The law is reated ro protect human interest."

"Penelitian ini membahas perkembangan pengaturan tindakan afirmasi untuk meningkatkan keterwakilan perempuan pada DPR RI dan bagaimana pelaksanaan pengaturan tersebut sejak awal tindakan afirmasi diterapkan pada tahun 2004, hingga terakhir kali tindakan afirmasi untuk DPR diterapkan, yaitu pada tahun 2014. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan sejarah hukum. Pembahasan dimulai dengan menganalisis tindakan afirmasi pada Undang-Undang Partai Politik, Undang-Undang Pemilihan Umum Anggota DPR, DPD, dan DPRD, dan Undang-Undang Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah. Selain itu penelitian ini akan membahas pelaksanaan undang-undang tersebut dengan menganalisis peraturan pelaksanaannya. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa terdapat dua bentuk tindakan afirmasi untuk perempuan masuk ke dalam DPR RI, yaitu melalui kuota partai politik dan kuota pada proses pencalonan legislatif. Setiap periode pengisian jabatan DPR, peraturan mengenai tindakan afirmasi perempuan tersebut selalu berubah. Namun dengan adanya perubahan-perubahan tersebut, belum menghasilkan peningkatan keterwakilan perempuan yang signifikan di DPR RI.

---

This research discusses about the development of affirmative action regulations in the increase of women's representation in the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat/DPR) of Republic of Indonesia and how the implementation of the regulations since the beginning of affirmative action was applied from 2004 until the last time affirmative action for DPR was implemented in 2014. The research method used is normative juridical with a legal history approach. The discussion begins by analyzing the affirmative action on the Acts of Political Parties, the Acts of the Election for Members of DPR, the Regional Representatives Council (Dewan Perwakilan Daerah/DPD) and the Local People’s Representatives Council (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah/DPRD), and the Acts of Representatives Council Institutions. In addition, this research will also discuss about the implementation of the regulations by analyzing the implementative regulations. The results of the research show that there are two forms of affirmative action for women to enter DPR, i.e.: through quotas of political parties and quotas in the process of legislative candidacy. In every period of DPR, the regulations on women's affirmative actions have been continuesly changing. However, with those changes, the regulations have not succeeded to increase women's representation in DPR significantly."