Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Judicial power as an independent and autonomous power must be free from any intervention and power, thus ensuring that judges possess independence and impartiality in handling cases. One of the measures for enhancing the independence and autonomy of the judiciary is by placing it under the one roof judicial arrangement developed by the Supreme Court, both from the judicial as well as the non-judicial technical aspects. Up to the present time, endeavors for bringing the four court jurisdictions under the one roof judicial arrangement developed by the Supreme Court have not been completely materialized, due to the existing dualism in judicial power at various courts. The objective of this research is to understand the developments in the endeavors towards bringing the Indonesian judicial system under the one roof judicial arrangement developed by the Supreme Court. The type of research applied is descriptive normative juridical research, namely legal research based on examining secondary data. As the research results indicate, the one roof system developed by the Supreme Court is already being implemented, with the exception of the Military Court and the Tax Court within the State Administration Court jurisdiction."

"Rekrutmen Hakim merupakan basis independensi kekuasaan kehakiman. Penelitian ini bermaksud menjawab permasalahan terkait konstruksi rekrutmen hakim di Indonesia, bagaimana implementasi setelah rekrutmen menjadi kewenangan satu atap, dan bagaimanakah rekrutmen hakim ideal untuk ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan dengan metode yuridis normatif melalui studi literatur, dengan perbandingan Negara Belanda, Perancis, Italia, Jepang dan India. Hasil Penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Konstruksi rekrutmen hakim Indonesia dibangun dari pergeseran rekrutmen oleh kementerian kehakiman menjadi model rekrutmen oleh Mahkamah Agung dengan sistem satu atap. Selanjutnya pasca amandemen rekrutmen hakim dijalankan dengan model Komisi Yudisial. Implementasi rekrutmen hakim di Indonesia masih belum sejalan dengan konsepsi Judicial Self governance, dimana rekrutmen masih belum terstandarisasi baik dari sisi pelaku, metode dan persyaratan. Rekrutmen hakim agung menggunakan metode appointment by judicial commission meskipun kewenangan DPR telah dianulir MK, namun metode cooperative appointment masih terus dijalankan dengan metode double fit and proper test. Rekrutmen hakim tingkat pertama dilaksanakan dengan metode recruitment by political institution dengan sub model Ministry, meskipun pasca putusan MK diperintahkan untuk dilakukan secara judicial self appointment namun nyatanya MA menyerahkan proses kepada Menpan-BKN yang notabene eksekutif. Sedangkan untuk hakim adhoc dan hakim pajak, potensial dengan intervensi eksekutif dalam pelaksanaan rekrutmennya. Sebagai bentuk ideal yang ditawarkan adalah rekrutmen hakim dengan metode appointed by judicial commission dengan model single body appointment, idealitas model rekrutmen terletak pada asas-asas rekruitmen yang transparan, akuntabel, partisipatif dan obyektif dengan sinergi antara Mahkamah Agung dan Komisi Yudisial.  Saran penelitian, pengaturan rekrutmen hakim perlu diatur dalam konstitusi kita, standarisasi tersebut termasuk dalam konsistensi personal judicial self-governance dengan berpegang pada Independensi dan efektifitas administrasi peradilan.   

---

The selection of Judges is the basis of judicial independence. This research was designed to exercise, the construction of judge appointment process in Indonesia, How the recruitment of judge was implemented under the one roof system and answering the ideal model of judge appointment in Indonesia. This was normative juridic research, conducted by literature study, and comparative study to Netherland, France, Italy, Japan, and India. The conclusions show that the construction of Judicial Appointment in Indonesia was shifted from Ministry of Justice to Judicial self-Appointment by the one roof system enactment.  The construction shifting continuous to “appointment by Judicial council/commission model” after the amendment. The implementation of the judge appointment process was not suitable to the principles of Judicial Self-governance, since the subject, method and requirement were not standardized. The judge appointment was Implemented as follow, Supreme court judge appointment was using the “appointment by judicial commission model” even though Legislative involvement were annulled by the supreme court, but the cooperative appointment is still being practiced with the double fit and proper test method. The Implementation of first instance judge appointment was conducted ala recruitment by political institution, in sub-Ministry model, this model was against the constitutional court decision since it should be held by “judicial self-appointment” since judicial commission involvement was unconstitutional, but supreme court was given the authority to state apparatus ministry and state civil servant Body (Menpan-BKN) instead. While the appointment of ad hoc judges and tax judges were potentially open the interference by the executive.  The study proposed the appointment by judicial commission with the single body appointment model as the ideal model. The ideal appointment method needs to rely on the core principles of appointment which are transparent, accountable, participative, and objective, this also need Supreme Court dan Judicial Commission synergy. The study suggests that our constitution needs to arrange the Judge appointment mechanism, this also includes the personal judicial self-governance based on independence and effectiveness of the judiciary."

"Article 27 paragraph (1) of Law No. 48 Year 2009 regarding Judicial Power states that specialcourts can only be formed in one of the court systems under the Supreme Court, which includegeneral courts, religious courts, military courts and state administration courts. However, article3A paragraph (2) of Law No. 50 Year 2009 concerning the Second Amendment to the Law onReligious Court places Shariah Court as a special court within the system of religious courts andas a special court within the system of general courts. Such positioning is inconsistent with Article27 paragraph (1) of the Law on Judicial Power which raises a legal issue and therefore requiresjuridical solution. The inconsistency is subject to juridical normative study within the scope ofa research concerning the level of horizontal synchronization, using descriptive analysis. Themethod applied for data collection in this research is through literature study supported by fielddata. The data obtained is analyzed by using juridical qualitative method. This study concludesthat, in fact, the Shariah Court is neither a special court, nor does it stand in two systems of courts.Both in terms of general administration as well as case management, the Shariah Court is aReligious Court for the territory of the Province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, the competence ofwhich has been expanded in the context of the implementation of special autonomy, particularlyin the field of the implementation of Islamic shari’a.Pasal 27 ayat (1) Undang-Undang No. 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman menyatakan:“Pengadilan khusus hanya dapat dibentuk dalam salah satu lingkungan peradilan yang beradadi bawah Mahkamah Agung.” Lingkungan badan peradilan di bawah Mahkamah Agung meliputiperadilan umum, peradilan agama, peradilan militer dan peradilan tata usaha negara.Pasal 3Aayat (2) Undang-Undang No. 50 Tahun 2009 tentang Perubahan Kedua atas Undang-UndangPeradilan Agama, menempatkan Mahkamah Syar’iyah sebagai pengadilan khusus dalamlingkungan peradilan agama dan sebagai pengadilan khusus dalam lingkungan peradilan umum.Penempatan Mahkamah Syar’iyah sebagai pengadilan khusus, sekaligus di dua lingkunganperadilan inkonsistensi dengan Pasal 27 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman.Inkonsistensi ini menimbulkan permasalahan hukum yang perlu dicarikan penyelesaiannyasecara yuridis. Permasalahan mengenai inkonsistensi aturan hukum tersebut dikaji secarayuridis normatif dalam cakupan penelitian terhadap taraf sinkronisasi horizontal denganspesifikasi penelitian deskriptif analisis. Teknik pengumpulan data pada kajian ini melalui studikepustakaan dan didukung data lapangan.Data yang diperoleh kemudiandianalisis secara yuridiskualitatif.Kajian ini menemukan bahwa Mahkamah Syar’iyah sesungguhnya bukanlah dalamkedudukan sebagai pengadilan khusus dan juga tidak berpijak pada dua lingkungan peradilan.Secaraadministrasi umum maupun pengelolaan perkara Mahkamah Syar’iyah merupakanPengadilan Agama untuk wilayah Propinsi NAD yang kewenangannya diperluasdalam rangkamelaksanakan otonomi khusus bidang pelaksanaan syariat Islam."

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini membahas tentang Analisi Implementasi Samsat On-Line Tiga Provinsi Pada Samsat Jakarta Selatan. Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif dengan metode analisis deskriptif. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah : Banyaknya wajib pajak yang enggan membayar pajak dikarenakan alasan domisili membuat Pemda harus mencari alternatif lain untuk itu pada April 2011 dibentuk Samsat Online Tiga Provinsi. Samsat ini dibentuk berdasarkan Nota Kesepahaman yang ditanda tangani oleh beberapa pihak namun dalam prakteknya Samsat Online ini hanya sebatas memindahkan gerai samsat masing masing provinsi ke lokasi samsat yang telah ditunjuk.

---

AbstractThis paper discusses about Analysis Implementation Of One Roof System Online of Three Provinces at One Roof System South of Jakarta, This type of research is qualitative research by descriptive analysis method. The results of this study are: The number of taxpayers who are reluctant to pay taxes due to the reason of domicile to the local government must find other alternatives, for it was formed in April 2011 One Roof System Online of Three Provinces. Units are formed based on a Memorandum of Understanding which was signed by several parties.;"

"How should courts interpret the law? While all agree that courts must be objective, people differ sharply over what this demands in practice: fidelity to the text? To the will of the people? To certain moral ideals? In Judicial Review in an Objective Legal System, Tara Smith breaks through the false dichotomies inherent in dominant theories - various forms of originalism, living constitutionalism, and minimalism - to present a new approach to judicial review. She contends that we cannot assess judicial review in isolation from the larger enterprise of which it is a part. By providing careful clarification of both the function of the legal system as well as of objectivity itself, she produces a compelling, firmly grounded account of genuinely objective judicial review. Smith's innovative approach marks a welcome advance for anyone interested in legal objectivity and individual rights."

"AbstractWe try to analyze the impact of Chinese Textile and Garment (T&G) imports, and the internal and external factors to the firm survival and growth of T&G industry in Indonesia, for the period study of 2002 to 2007. Probit regression model is used to analyze the impact of Chinese imports to the survival of firm, while OLS regression model is used to analyze its growth. It shows that the ability of firms' survival is influenced by the internal and external factors. The Chinese imports give positive impact to the firms' survival ability. On the other hand, firm's growth is only affected by its internal characteristics, while the impact of Chinese imports is proven not significant. The Heckman test result stated that there are no correlation between firms' ability to survive and the firm growth behavior.AbstrakStudi ini menganalisis dampak dari penetrasi impor TPT Cina, faktor internal, serta faktor eksternal terhadap kebertahanan dan pertumbuhan perusahaan dalam industri TPT Indonesia periode tahun 2002-2007. Metode probit regression digunakan untuk mengetahui dampak impor Cina terhadap kebertahanan perusahaan, sementara regresi linear sederhana (OLS) digunakan untuk menganalisis pertumbuhannya. Ditemukan bahwa kebertahanan perusahaan dipengaruhi oleh karakteristik internal dan eksternal, serta impor Cina yang memberikan dampak positif. Sementara pertumbuhan perusahaan hanya dipengaruhi oleh faktor internal, di mana impor Cina tidak memberikan dampak signikan. Hasil pengujian Heckman menyatakan tidak ada indikasi hubungan antara kebertahanan perusahaan dengan perilaku pertumbuhannya."