Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"There needs to be good will among public education policy makers at national among and regional levels to the point of even inviting representatives from teachers at the local level to participate in the making of the curriculum, asking to be involved in the management of the educational process, soliciting their help in the plan at all levels, asking them to assist in the periodical assessments and following them up on it. These teachers should, in fact, be and actually are at the front line the effort to provide national policy for the system of education and should be actively involved in its Any educational system should aim at the eradication of poverty from society and, at the same time, out of justice, to provide education to everyone and for everyone. These principles really need to be followed considering the variety o the situations of people who are living in Indonesia."

"MPLIKASI mendasar dari Perubahan UUD NRI Tahun 1945 salah satunya politik pendidikan yang berkaitan dengan kewenangan pemerintah daerah dalam kerangka otonomi daerah. Sehingga, desentralisasi kewenangan pemerintah daerah ternyatakan dalam regionalisasi pendidikan. Satu sistem pendidikan nasional yang diamanatkan dalam Pasal 31 Ayat (3) UUD NRI Tahun 1945 sejatinya mencakup nilai nilai keindonesiaan dalam regionalisasi pengajaran dan pendidikan."

"Desentralisasi merupakan agenda reformasi bangsa Indonesia yang paling penting setelah pemilihan umum demokratis pada Nuji 1999. Desentralisasi menyentuh seluruh kehidupan bangsa termasuk program dan kegiatan pendidikan...."

"makalah disampaikan dalam seminar tentang badan hukum pendidikan (BHP) sebagai penyeenggaraan pendidikan, diselenggarakan oleh BPHN Departemen Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia, tanggal 12-13 juli 2005 di yogyakarta "

"ABSTRAKKasus ini bermula dari sengketa kepemilikan Yayasan Pendidikan CendekiaUtama (YPCU), antara Rektor Universitas Dr. Soetomo dan Organ Yayasan.Rektor mengintimidasi Organ Yayasan dan berhasil mendapatkan SuratPernyataan Pengunduran Diri dan Surat Kuasa dari 3 (tiga) orang dari 4 (empat)Dewan Pengurus Yayasan yang sekaligus juga Pendiri melalui prosedur yangtidak sesuai dengan ketentuan Anggaran Dasar.Dalam putusan Pengadilan Pidana Notaris sebagai yang membuat AktaPernyataan Keputusan Rapat dijatuhi hukuman karena telah melakukan TindakPidana Pemalsuan Surat Pasal 264 ayat (1) ke-1 KUHPidana jo Pasal 55 ayat (1)ke-1 KUHPidana dan Penerima Kuasa yang menghadap kepada Notaris untukmembuat akta tersebut dijatuhi hukuman telah melakukan Tindak PidanaMenyuruh Memasukan Keterangan Palsu Pasal 266 ayat (1) ke-1 KUHPidana joPasal 55 ayat (1) ke-1 KUHPidana. Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh yaitu, Notaristidak dapat didakwa melakukan tindak pidana tersebut karena Notaris hanyamengkonstantir apa yg ditulis dalam Risalah Rapat ke dalam akta Notaris, danPenerima Kuasa tidak dapat dimintai pertanggung jawabannya atas kebenaranmateriil dari tindakan hukum yang dikuasakan kepadanya sepanjang tidak dapatdibuktikan sebaliknya.Kesimpulan dari kasus ini seharusnya kepada Notaris lebih tepat didakwa telahmelakukan kelalaian/alpa karena tidak meneliti prosedur Rapat Organ Yayasansesuai Anggaran Dasar Yayasan dan Penerima Kuasa sepanjang tidak dapatdibuktikan bahwa ia tahu tentang fakta hukum yang sebenarnya tidak dapat didakwa dengan pasal tersebut.

---

AbstractThis case begins with the dispute of ownership of Yayasan PendidikanCendekiaUtama (YPCU),between Rector of University of Dr. Soetomo andFoundation Organ. The Rector intimidated Foundation Organ and obtained Letterof Statement of Resignation and Power of Attorney from 3 (three) of 4 (four)Board of Managements of Foundation that were also the Founders of theFoundation through the inappropriate procedure with the provisions of Articles ofAssociation.In the decision of Criminal Court, the Notary which denoting the statements of theMinutes of Meeting into Deed of Statement of Meeting Resolution has beenpunished because he/she has committed crime of Certificate Counterfeitingpursuant to Article 264 Paragraph (1) number 1 of Criminal Code jo Article 55Paragraph (1) number 1 of Criminal Code. Meanwhile, the Grantee who appearedbefore the Notary to make the deed has been punished committing crime ofOrdering Someone to Make False Information pursuant to Article 266 Paragraph(1) number 1 of Criminal Code jo Article 55 Paragraph (1) number 1 of CriminalCode.The result reveals that the Notary cannot be charged with such criminal act sincethe Notary has only denoted the statement of what was written in Minutes ofMeeting into Notarial Deed.Moreover, the Grantee cannot be requested his/herresponsibility upon the valid material and legal action empowered to him as longas it cannot be proved otherwiseThe research concludes that it is more suitable if the Notary is charged withdereliction/neglectful since he/she did noat examine the procedure ofFoundationOrgan Meeting in accordance with Foundation?s Articles of Association and theGrantee as long as it cannot be proved that he knows the legal fact that actuallycannot be charged with such articles."