Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Hasil Pencarian

Ditemukan 11 dokumen yang sesuai dengan query
cover
Habib Adjie, 1961-
Sanksi perdata dan administratif terhadap notaris sebagai pejabat publik
Bandung: Refika Aditama, 2009
347.016 HAB s
Buku Teks  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Tri Hartanto
Peran dan tanggungjawab notaris terhadap merger pelaku usaha berbentuk perseroan menurut perpektif hukum persaingan usaha = The roles and responsibilities of public notary to merger by business entities in the form of limited liability company (Perseroan) in accordance to the perspective of business competition law
"Tesis ini membahas peran dan tanggungjawab notaris sebagai satu-satu pejabat publik yang diberikan kewenangan oleh undang-undang membuatkan akta merger dan melakukan pengurusan pengesahan anggaran dasar pelaku usaha berbentuk perseroan bila terjadi perubahan anggaran dasar akibat merger menurut hukum persaingan usaha. Terutama menyangkut kewajiban pemberitahuan dan konsultasi terhadap merger yang telah memenuhi threshold wajib lapor.
The thesis discusses about the roles and responsibilities of public notary in their position as the only public official who are given the mandate by law to develop merger act and manage the legalization of article of association of business entities in the form of perseroan should a change of article of association due to the merger based on business competition law. The obligation to report and consult regarding the merger that has fulfill the threshold will be highlighted in this thesis."
Depok: Universitas Indonesia, 2011
T28691
UI - Tesis Open  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Eliza Dayinta Harumanti
Pengaturan imunitas bagi pejabat publik dalam proses litigasi perdata menurut teori imunitas yang terbatas (restrictive sovereign immunity) dalam hukum Internasional = Immunity of foreign individual public officials in a civil procedure under restrictive sovereign immunity in international law
"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai perkembangan teori restrictive sovereign immunity di dalam hukum internasional dan penerapannya terhadap imunitas pejabat publik. Penulis akan menganalisis tujuh putusan pengadilan dari beberapa negara dan pengadilan internasional yang menggunakan pendekatan imunitas yang terbatas di dalam dalil gugatan melawan negara di hadapan pengadilan asing. Analisis didasarkan pada studi literatur mengenai perkembangan teori imunitas yang terbatas dan pengaturannya dengan meninjau perjanjian internasional dan peraturan perundang-undangan nasional serta hukum kebiasaan internasional. Simpulan yang didapatkan menunjukkan bahwa adanya perubahan penerimaan pendekatan imunitas absolut menjadi pendekatan imunitas negara secara terbatas oleh berbagai putusan pengadilan nasional. Pembatasan imunitas negara didasarkan kepada dua tes, yaitu rationae personae dan rationae materiae. Praktik ini diterapkan secara konsisten di dalam praktik-praktik negara.
This thesis discusses the development of restrictive sovereign immunity under international law and its application to public official immunity. The author of this thesis analyses seven judgments of national courts and international tribunals regarding the use of restrictive sovereign immunity as the claimants motions to raise a civil actions against State before foreign courts. The analysis is based on literature studies concerning the development of restrictive sovereign immunity theory and how it is governed in customary international law, treaties and national laws. In conclusion, there has been a change of practice of national courts to accept the restrictive approach to immunity in numerous decisions. There are two limitations to this approach, namely rationae personae and rationae materiae. These limitations are consistently referred in the State practices."
Depok: Universitas Indonesia, 2014
S54994
UI - Skripsi Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Mochamad Taufik Riyadi
Peninjauan ulang kewenangan DPR dalam seleksi pengisian pejabat publik = Review on house of representative's DPR authority in the selection of public officials
"[ABSTRAK
Kekuasaan dan kewenangan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) yang kuat
akibat perubahan UUD 1945 dapat dilihat dalam desain skema keterlibatan DPR pada
pengisian sejumlah jabatan publik yang terbilang strategis. Dalam perubahan UUD
1945 dikenal 3 (tiga) bentuk pengangkatan pejabat publik yang melibatkan DPR,
yakni melalui pertimbangan, persetujuan dan pemilihan. Pada awalnya urgensi suatu
pengangkatan pejabat publik memerlukan campur tangan DPR karena merupakan
bagian dari varian fungsi pengawasan DPR di samping tentunya bagian dari fungsi
checks and balances atas kewenangan presiden. Hal yang menjadi perdebatan adalah
ketika kewenangan dan kekuasaan DPR dalam seleksi pengisian pejabat publik
terjadi penyimpangan akibat tidak transparan dan kredibel dalam melakukan proses
pengisian seleksi pejabat publik.
Penelitian ini akan memfokuskan pada analisis terhadap kewenangan DPR
dalam seleksi pengisian pejabat publik yang diberikan oleh UUD 1945. Di samping
itu juga menganalisa tentang putusan perkara Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 27/PUUXII/
2013 tentang pengujian terhadap pemilihan Hakim Agung MA (Mahkamah
Agung) dan putusan nomor 16/PUU-XII/2014 tentang pengujian terhadap pemilihan
anggota Komisi Yudisial (KY) dan anggota Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK).
Dimana dalam putusan pemilihan Hakim Agung MA dan anggota KY itu
mengembalikan kewenangan DPR sebatas hanya menyetujui atau tidak menyetujui
para calon Hakim Agung MA dan anggota KY. Penelitian ini juga melakukan
perbandingan pengisian pejabat publik dengan Negara Amerika Serikat, Korea
Selatan dan Filipina. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif,
dengan analisis data deskriptif kualitatif dan komparatif.
ABSTRACT
The strong power and authority of the House of Representatives (DPR) due to
the amendment of the Constitution of Indonesia year 1945 (UUD 1945) can be seen
in the design of the House of Representative?s involvement scheme in the election of
several strategic public position. In the amendment of UUD 1945 there are three (3)
forms the appointment of public officials involving the DPR, through the
consideration, approval, and election. At first, the urgency of the appointment of
public officials requires the intervention of House of Representative as part of a
variant of the House supervision functions in addition to the checks and balances
function on the authority of the president. The debate arises when there is deviation in
the authority and power of the House of Representatives in the election of public
officials due to non-transparent and credible process of filling the election of public
officials.
This study will focus on the analysis of the authority of the House of
Representatives in the selection of public officials granted by the Constitution of
Indonesia year 1945. In addition, this study also analyzes the decision of the
Constitutional Court case No. 27 / PUU-XII / 2013 concerning the testing of the
election of the Chief Justice of Supreme Court (Supreme Court) and decision number
16 / PUU-XII / 2014 concerning the testing of the election of members of the Judicial
Commission (KY) and members of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Where in the election decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and
members of the Judicial Commission, the authority of the House of Representative is
restored limitedly only to approve or disapprove the candidates of the Chief Justices
of the Supreme Court and members of KY. This study also compares the appointment
of public officials in the United States, South Korea and the Philippines. This study
uses the normative juridical approach, with qualitative and comparative descriptive
data analysis.;The strong power and authority of the House of Representatives (DPR) due to
the amendment of the Constitution of Indonesia year 1945 (UUD 1945) can be seen
in the design of the House of Representative?s involvement scheme in the election of
several strategic public position. In the amendment of UUD 1945 there are three (3)
forms the appointment of public officials involving the DPR, through the
consideration, approval, and election. At first, the urgency of the appointment of
public officials requires the intervention of House of Representative as part of a
variant of the House supervision functions in addition to the checks and balances
function on the authority of the president. The debate arises when there is deviation in
the authority and power of the House of Representatives in the election of public
officials due to non-transparent and credible process of filling the election of public
officials.
This study will focus on the analysis of the authority of the House of
Representatives in the selection of public officials granted by the Constitution of
Indonesia year 1945. In addition, this study also analyzes the decision of the
Constitutional Court case No. 27 / PUU-XII / 2013 concerning the testing of the
election of the Chief Justice of Supreme Court (Supreme Court) and decision number
16 / PUU-XII / 2014 concerning the testing of the election of members of the Judicial
Commission (KY) and members of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Where in the election decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and
members of the Judicial Commission, the authority of the House of Representative is
restored limitedly only to approve or disapprove the candidates of the Chief Justices
of the Supreme Court and members of KY. This study also compares the appointment
of public officials in the United States, South Korea and the Philippines. This study
uses the normative juridical approach, with qualitative and comparative descriptive
data analysis.;The strong power and authority of the House of Representatives (DPR) due to
the amendment of the Constitution of Indonesia year 1945 (UUD 1945) can be seen
in the design of the House of Representative?s involvement scheme in the election of
several strategic public position. In the amendment of UUD 1945 there are three (3)
forms the appointment of public officials involving the DPR, through the
consideration, approval, and election. At first, the urgency of the appointment of
public officials requires the intervention of House of Representative as part of a
variant of the House supervision functions in addition to the checks and balances
function on the authority of the president. The debate arises when there is deviation in
the authority and power of the House of Representatives in the election of public
officials due to non-transparent and credible process of filling the election of public
officials.
This study will focus on the analysis of the authority of the House of
Representatives in the selection of public officials granted by the Constitution of
Indonesia year 1945. In addition, this study also analyzes the decision of the
Constitutional Court case No. 27 / PUU-XII / 2013 concerning the testing of the
election of the Chief Justice of Supreme Court (Supreme Court) and decision number
16 / PUU-XII / 2014 concerning the testing of the election of members of the Judicial
Commission (KY) and members of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Where in the election decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and
members of the Judicial Commission, the authority of the House of Representative is
restored limitedly only to approve or disapprove the candidates of the Chief Justices
of the Supreme Court and members of KY. This study also compares the appointment
of public officials in the United States, South Korea and the Philippines. This study
uses the normative juridical approach, with qualitative and comparative descriptive
data analysis.;The strong power and authority of the House of Representatives (DPR) due to
the amendment of the Constitution of Indonesia year 1945 (UUD 1945) can be seen
in the design of the House of Representative?s involvement scheme in the election of
several strategic public position. In the amendment of UUD 1945 there are three (3)
forms the appointment of public officials involving the DPR, through the
consideration, approval, and election. At first, the urgency of the appointment of
public officials requires the intervention of House of Representative as part of a
variant of the House supervision functions in addition to the checks and balances
function on the authority of the president. The debate arises when there is deviation in
the authority and power of the House of Representatives in the election of public
officials due to non-transparent and credible process of filling the election of public
officials.
This study will focus on the analysis of the authority of the House of
Representatives in the selection of public officials granted by the Constitution of
Indonesia year 1945. In addition, this study also analyzes the decision of the
Constitutional Court case No. 27 / PUU-XII / 2013 concerning the testing of the
election of the Chief Justice of Supreme Court (Supreme Court) and decision number
16 / PUU-XII / 2014 concerning the testing of the election of members of the Judicial
Commission (KY) and members of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Where in the election decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and
members of the Judicial Commission, the authority of the House of Representative is
restored limitedly only to approve or disapprove the candidates of the Chief Justices
of the Supreme Court and members of KY. This study also compares the appointment
of public officials in the United States, South Korea and the Philippines. This study
uses the normative juridical approach, with qualitative and comparative descriptive
data analysis., The strong power and authority of the House of Representatives (DPR) due to
the amendment of the Constitution of Indonesia year 1945 (UUD 1945) can be seen
in the design of the House of Representative’s involvement scheme in the election of
several strategic public position. In the amendment of UUD 1945 there are three (3)
forms the appointment of public officials involving the DPR, through the
consideration, approval, and election. At first, the urgency of the appointment of
public officials requires the intervention of House of Representative as part of a
variant of the House supervision functions in addition to the checks and balances
function on the authority of the president. The debate arises when there is deviation in
the authority and power of the House of Representatives in the election of public
officials due to non-transparent and credible process of filling the election of public
officials.
This study will focus on the analysis of the authority of the House of
Representatives in the selection of public officials granted by the Constitution of
Indonesia year 1945. In addition, this study also analyzes the decision of the
Constitutional Court case No. 27 / PUU-XII / 2013 concerning the testing of the
election of the Chief Justice of Supreme Court (Supreme Court) and decision number
16 / PUU-XII / 2014 concerning the testing of the election of members of the Judicial
Commission (KY) and members of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Where in the election decision of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and
members of the Judicial Commission, the authority of the House of Representative is
restored limitedly only to approve or disapprove the candidates of the Chief Justices
of the Supreme Court and members of KY. This study also compares the appointment
of public officials in the United States, South Korea and the Philippines. This study
uses the normative juridical approach, with qualitative and comparative descriptive
data analysis.]"
2015
T43058
UI - Tesis Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Fathudin
Pembatasan hak prerogatif presiden dalam pengangkatan pejabat publik kajian tentang mekanisme pengangkatan kapolrdi dan Panglima TNI = Restrictions on the presidential prerogative in the appointment of public officials a study of the mechanism of the appointment of chief of the indonesian national police and commander of the Indonesian National Armed Forces
"ABSTRAK
Tesis ini membahas tentang pembatasan hak prerogatif presiden dalam pengangkatan pejabat publik khusunya kepala kepolisian negara republik Indonesia dan Panglima TNI. Pembatasan tersebut berupa hak konfirmasi DPR dalam proses pengangkatan pejabat publik. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian normatif yuridis dengan pendekatan pendekatan undang-undang (statuta approach). Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa meskipun intitusi Polri dan TNI merupakan institusi pelaksana fungsi pemerintahan di bidang pertahanan dan keamanan yang kedudukannya berada dalam ruang lingkup kekuasaan eksekutif yakni di bawah Presiden serta jabatan Kepala Polri dan Panglima TNI merupakan jabatan karir, namun karena kedua institusi tersebut merupakan alat negara bukan alat pemerintahan maka perlu adanya pengawasan dari DPR sebagai lembaga yang merepresentasikan kepentingan rakyat. Pada konteks ini jika semula pengangkatan Kapolri dan TNI merupakan kewenangan mandiri (hak prerogatif) seorang presiden, kini menjadi hak prerogatif dengan pembatasan. Di masa yang akan datang perlu pengaturan secara tegas oleh konstitusi tentang pembatasan hak prerogatif presiden dalam pengangkatan Kapolri dan Panglima TNI. Karena, pembatasan atas hak prerogatif presiden semestinya hanya dapat dilakukan jika secara tegas diatur oleh konstitusi itu sendiri.
ABSTRACT
This thesis focuses on the study of the restrictions on the Presidential Prerogative in the Appointment of Public Officials especially Chief of the Indonesian National Police and Commander of The Indonesian National Armed Forces. That Restrictions is the right of confirmation of the House of Representatives (DPR) in the process of appointment of public officials. This research is a normative research that use statuta approach. The results of this research is indicate that although the police and military institutions are the implementing agencies of government functions in the field of defense and security whose position is within the scope of executive power under the President, and the Chief of the Indonesian National Police and the Commander of The Indonesian National Armed Forces are career positions, but because these institutions are the state apparatus not government apparatus, so the supervision or control of the Parliament (DPR) as an institution that represents the interests of the people is needed. In this context, the appointment of Chief of the Indonesian National Police and the Commander of The Indonesian National Armed Forces is still prerogative of president but by the restrictions.The reseacher sugests that in the future, there should be regulation expressly by the constitution for the restriction of the presidential prerogative in the appointment of Chief of the Indonesian National Police and the Commander of The Indonesian National Armed Forces. Because, restriction on the prerogative of the president should only be performed if expressly provided by the Constitution itself."
Depok: Universitas Indonesia, 2016
T44886
UI - Tesis Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Scholastica Gerintya Saraswati
Kritik sosial terhadap pejabat publik: studi semiotika pada meme = Social critics on public officials: semiotic studies on meme
"ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan tujuan untuk mengetahui bagaimana kritik sosial terhadap
pejabat publik direpresentasikan dalam meme. Analisis teks menggunakan semiotika
Roland Barthes. Meme yang diteliti adalah meme yang membahas tentang pejabat publik,
mengandung kritik, dan populer pada kurun waktu tertentu. Analisis pembahasan
diperkuat dengan menggunakan konsep meme dan mitos dalam Barthes. Hasil penelitian
menunjukkan bahwa media massa dianggap tidak lagi mampu menyuarakan kritik sosial,
sehingga masyarakat memanfaatkan meme sebagai media alternatif penyampaian kritik.
Temuan lainnya adalah bahwa mitos di dalam meme memperkuat gambaran pejabat di
benak masyarakat. Pemilihan dan penempatan teks di dalam meme adalah hasil dari
framing yang dilakukan oleh pihak-pihak tertentu dalam upayanya untuk menyampaikan
kritik. Tanpa mitos, fungsi meme sebagai media penyampaian pesan tidak akan kuat.
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research is to find out how social critics on public officials is
represented through a meme. Text analysis is done using Ronald Barthes' semiotics. The
memes being researched are the ones mentioning public officials, which contains critics,
and also popular within a certain period of time. The analysis discussion is then
strengthened by Barthes' concepts of meme and myth. The findings shows that mass
media is no longer considered capable of expressing social criticism, therefore the society
then uses memes as an alternative media to express their critics. Other findings suggest
that myths within memes strengthens the image of public officials in the minds of society.
The text selection and placement inside memes are a result of framings that are done by
certain parties in their effort to express critics."
2016
S65225
UI - Skripsi Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Mutiara Nabila
Dramatisme Retorika Pejabat Publik Melalui Media Sosial (Studi Pada Sosialisasi Program Organisasi Penggerak Nadiem Makarim) = The Rhetoric Dramatism of Public Officials Through Social Media (Study On The Socialization Of Nadiem Makarim's Organizational Program)
"XPenelitian ini bertujuan menjelaskan elemen dramatis dan pola dramatisme dalam penggunaan media sosial Mendikbudristek ketika melakukan sosialisasi POP sehingga menimbulkan berbagai kritikan. Penelitian ini menggunakan paradigma interpretif dan pendekatan kualitatif deskriptif-interpretatif untuk. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah analisis dramatisme pentad dimana dengan analisis ini peneliti dapat melihat lima cara untuk mengetahui dan melihat motif pernyataan Mendikbud Nadiem ketika sosialisasi POP dan strategi multimodal untuk melakukan analisis. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa Nadiem cenderung menjadikan agency sebagai elemen kunci untuk melancarkan tujuannya dengan menayangkan video testimoni, menyebutkan harapannya pada perangkat-perangkat sekolah seperti Kepala Sekolah, Guru, mahasiswa dan lainnya, dan menggunakan identifikasi sebagai motif meluncurkan POP dengan menempatkan diri sebagai masyarakat yang merasakan belum ada perkembangan yang signifikan pada pendidikan Indonesia. Nadiem juga cenderung melakukan retorika klasik sehingga tidak bisa membentuk kesatuan sosial. Kemendikbud menonjolkan elemen scene, di mana media sosial juga digunakan tidak hanya sebagai alat atau agency tapi juga sebagai tempat yang aman untuk menyampaikan pendapat-pendapatnya.
This study aims to explain the dramatic elements and dramatic patterns in the use of the Minister of Education and Culture's social media when conducting POP socialization, which has led to various criticisms. This study uses an interpretive paradigm and a qualitative descriptive-interpretative approach. The research method used is pentad dramatism analysis where with this analysis the researcher can see five ways to find out and see the motives of the Minister of Education and Culture Nadiem's algorithm when socializing POP and multimodal strategies for conducting analysis. The results of the study concluded that Nadiem tends to make the agency as the key element to carry out his goals by showing video testimonials, mentioning his hopes for school officials such as principals, teachers, students and others, and using identification as a motive for launching POP by placing himself as a community that feels there has been no significant development in Indonesian education. Nadiem also tends to use classical rhetoric so that he cannot form social unity. The Ministry of Education and Culture emphasizes scene elements, where social media is also used not only as a tool or agency but also as a safe place to express their opinions."
Jakarta: Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik Universitas Indonesia, 2022
T-pdf
UI - Tesis Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Arneta Raisha Nanako
Analisis Perbuatan Doxing kepada Pejabat Publik dan Penyelenggara Negara Ditinjau dari Prinsip Keterbukaan Informasi Publik dan Pertanggungjawabannya = Analysis of Doxing Actions to Public Officials in Review of the Principles of Public Information Disclosure and Liability
"Penyelenggara Negara dan Pejabat Publik sebagai Subjek Data Pribadi wajib melaporkan kekayaan mereka melalui Laporan Harta Kekayaan Negara (LHKPN). Subjek Data Pribadi wajib melaporkan harta kekayaan mereka melalui LHKPN yang dikelola oleh Pemerintah. Permasalahan timbul ketika Pemerintah memiliki kewajiban untuk melakukan transparansi atas informasi publik untuk mewujudkan pemerintahan yang transparan berdasarkan UU KIP. Namun, di sisi lain Pemerintah sebagai Pengendali Data Pribadi wajib untuk melindungi kerahasiaan Data Pribadi yang dikumpulkannya. Pelindungan dan kerahasiaan Data Pribadi subjeknya harus dijaga dengan ketat untuk mencegah penyebaran yang berpotensi membahayakan Penyelenggara Negara dan Pejabat Publik, jika infromasi pribadi tersebut tidak dijaga kerahasiaannya, maka akan berpotensi terjadinya doxing yang membahayakan Penyelenggara Negara. Doxing adalah kegiatan menyebarkan informasi seseorang secara sengaja dengan niat jahat. Penelitian ini akan menganalisis perbuatan doxing yang ditinjau berdasarkan prinsip keterbukaan informasi berdasarkan norma hukum Indonesia dan bagaimana implementasi hukumnya. Penelitian ini akan mengkaji2 (dua) permasalahan, yaitu tinjauan pelaporan LHKPN tercakup sebagai pengecualian dari kewajiban pemrosesan data pribadi dalam UU PDP serta bentuk pertanggungjawaban pelaku doxing terhadap Pejabat Publik dan Penyelenggara Negara di Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah doktrinal yang berfokus dalam peraturan terutama peraturan terkait Pelindungan Data Pribadi dan Keterbukaan Informasi Publik di Indonesia. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa pelaporan dan pengunggahan informasi pribadi milik Penyelenggara Negara dan Pejabat Publik melalui  LHKPN tidak dikecualikan dalam UU PDP. Meskipun terdapat pengecualian perlindungan Data Pribadi dalam Pasal 15 ayat (1) dan Pasal 50 ayat (1) UU PDP, doxing terhadap Pejabat Publik dan Penyelenggara Negara tidak termasuk ke dalam pengecualian-pengecualian tersebut. Melalui penelitian dengan metode penelitian doktrinal ini, dapat disimpulkan bahwa, Pejabat Publik dan Penyelenggara Negara berhak menuntut implementasi hak-hak mereka sesuai dengan UU PDP. Penelitian juga mengungkapkan pertanggungjawaban terhadap doxing terhadap Penyelenggara Negara dan Pejabat Publik tanpa persetujuan yang diatur dalam UU ITE, UU PDP, dan UU KIP
State Organizers and Public Officials as Personal Data Subjects are required to report their wealth through the State Asset Report (LHKPN). Personal Data Subjects are required to report their wealth through the LHKPN managed by the Government. Problems arise when the Government has an obligation to make public information transparent to realize a transparent government based on the KIP Law. However, on the other hand, the Government as the Controller of Personal Data is obliged to protect the confidentiality of the Personal Data it collects. The protection and confidentiality of the subject's Personal Data must be strictly maintained to prevent dissemination that could potentially endanger State Administrators and Public Officials, if the personal information is not kept confidential, it will potentially cause doxing which endangers State Administrators. Doxing is the act of intentionally spreading someone's information with malicious intent. This research will analyze the act of doxing based on the principle of information disclosure based on Indonesian legal norms and how the legal implementation is. This research will examine 2 (two) issues, namely the review of LHKPN reporting included as an exception to the obligation to process personal data in the PDP Law and the form of liability of doxing perpetrators against Public Officials and State Organizers in Indonesia. The research method used is doctrinal which focuses on regulations, especially regulations related to Personal Data Protection and Public Information Disclosure in Indonesia. The results of the study concluded that the reporting and uploading of personal information belonging to State Organizers and Public Officials through LHKPN is not excluded in the PDP Law. Although there are exceptions to the protection of Personal Data in Article 50 paragraph (1) of the PDP Law, doxing of Public Officials and State Officials is not included in these exceptions. Through this doctrinal research method, it can be concluded that Public Officials and State Administrators are entitled to demand the implementation of their rights in accordance with the PDP Law. The research also reveals the liability for doxing State Officials and Public Officials without consent regulated in the ITE Law, PDP Law, and KIP Law."
Depok: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2024
S-pdf
UI - Skripsi Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Nasution, Ismail Arif
Urgensi Pengaturan Perampasan Aset terhadap Pejabat Publik yang Memiliki Kekayaan yang tidak dapat Dijelaskan (Unexplained Wealth): Studi Perbandingan Indonesia, Australia, dan Filipina = The Urgency of Asset Forfeiture Against Public Officials with Unexplained Wealth: A Comparative Study of Indonesia, Australia, and the Philippines
"Penelitian ini mengkaji urgensi penerapan perampasan aset terhadap pejabat publik yang memiliki kekayaan yang tidak dapat dijelaskan (unexplained wealth) di Indonesia, dengan memperbandingkan mekanisme yang diterapkan di Australia dan Filipina. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian doktrinal dengan pendekatan undang-undang, historis, dan komparatif. Di Australia, perampasan aset dilakukan melalui mekanisme Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO), yang memungkinkan penyelidikan dan perampasan aset yang tidak dapat dibuktikan asal-usulnya. Filipina, melalui Republic Act No. 1379, juga memiliki mekanisme perampasan untuk aset yang dianggap tidak sah atau tidak sesuai dengan pendapatan pejabat publik. Kedua negara ini menunjukkan bahwa perampasan aset NCB dapat menjadi instrumen efektif dalam mencegah dan menanggulangi praktik pengumpulan kekayaan yang tidak sah oleh pejabat publik. Perbandingan ini memberikan pelajaran penting bagi Indonesia, yang masih menghadapi tantangan dalam menanggulangi praktik pengumpulan kekayaan tidak sah di kalangan pejabat publik. Penelitian ini merekomendasikan penerapan model Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) yang disesuaikan dengan konteks sistem hukum Indonesia. Penelitian ini diharapkan dapat memberikan solusi atas ketidakjelasan asal-usul kekayaan pejabat publik dengan mekanisme perampasan yang adil, efektif, transparan, dan akuntabel.
This research examines the urgency of implementing asset forfeiture against public officials with unexplained wealth in Indonesia, by comparing mechanisms applied in Australia and the Philippines. The research employs doctrinal research methods with a legislative, historical, and comparative approach. In Australia, asset forfeiture is carried out through the Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) mechanism, which enables the investigation and forfeiture of assets whose origins cannot be proven. The Philippines, through Republic Act No. 1379, also has a forfeiture mechanism for assets deemed unexplained or unlawfully acquired asset of public officials. Both countries demonstrate that NCB asset forfeiture can be an effective instrument in preventing and addressing the accumulation of unexplained wealth by public officials. This comparison provides valuable lessons for Indonesia, which continues to face challenges in addressing the unlawful accumulation of wealth among public officials. This research recommends the adoption of the Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) model, adapted to the context of Indonesia’s legal system. It is expected that this model can offer a solution to the ambiguity surrounding the origins of public officials' wealth through a fair, effective, transparent, and accountable forfeiture mechanism."
Jakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2025
T-pdf
UI - Tesis Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Fakhry Amin
Pemberhentian kepala daerah sebagai pejabat publik oleh DPRD di Indonesia = Dismissal of head of region as public officials by council in Indonesian / Fakhry Amin
"ABSTRAK
Tesis ini mengkaji tentang mekanisme pemberhentian Kepala Daerah sebagai pejabat publik oleh DPRD di Indonesia dalam peraturan perundang-undangan yang pernah berlaku di Indonesia dan permasalahan dalam proses pemberhentian Kepala Daerah yang dilakukan oleh DPRD sejak berlakunya Undang-Undang No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah serta memperbandingkan dengan proses impeachment untuk mendapatkan titik temu dalam persepsi yang selama ini berkembang bahwa pemberhentian Kepala Daerah oleh DPRD merupakan mekanisme impeachment, sebuah mekanisme pendakwaan untuk memberhentikan pejabat publik dari jabatannya yang berkembang di negara federal. Penelitian ini dikaji dengan melalui pendekatan yuridis-normatif. Selain itu, penelitian ini juga menggunakan pendekatan yuridis-historis dan yuridis-komparatif. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif dan metode penelitian hukum empiris sekaligus tetapi, dalam penelitian ini lebih menitikberatkan pada penelitian hukum normatif, sedangkan penelitian hukum empiris berfungsi sebagai informasi pendukung. Pendekatan yang bersifat yuridis-normatif tersebut akan dilakukan dengan mempergunakan bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder, dan bahan hukum tersier yang dianalisis menggunakan silogisme dan interpretasi. Sementara itu, penelitian empiris dalam penelitian ini dilakukan dengan cara mengumpulkan data melalui berbagai diskusi dengan pihak-pihak yang memiliki kompetensi dan pengetahuan yang mendalam di bidang hukum tata negara.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa perkembangan mekanisme pemberhentian Kepala Daerah mengalami perubahan dari masa ke masa. Dalam perkembangannya, saat ini mekanisme yang hadir dalam ketentuan Undang-Undang No. 32 Tahun 2004 Tentang Pemerintahan Daerah bukanlah mekanisme “impeachment” karena desentralisasi yang tercipta di Indonesia bersifat “desentralisasi eksekutif”, sehingga dalam proses pemberhentian tersebut tidak melibatkan lembaga legislatif, tetapi lembaga pembuat kebijakan yang dikenal dengan istilah “council” di Inggris yang mirip dengan peran DPRD di Indonesia saat ini. Selain itu, mekanisme “Pemberhentian Kepala Daerah oleh DPRD” belum secara rinci diatur di dalam Undang-Undang Pemerintahan Daerah dewasa ini, termasuk dalam hal beracara di Mahkamah Agung. Oleh karena itu, untuk menjamin asas keadilan, kemanfaatan dan kepastian hukum, sekiranya apabila dilakukan revisi terhadap Undang-undang Pemerintahan Daerah mekanisme “Pemberhentian Kepala Daerah oleh DPRD” harus diatur lebih rinci lagi di dalam Undang-Undang.
ABSTRACT
This thesis examines the mechanisms "Dismissal of Head of region as public officials by (DPRD/council) in Indonesian" in legislation ever prevailing in Indonesia and the problems in the dismissal process conducted by the Regional Council since enactment the "Act Number 32 of 2004 on Regional Government" as well as to compare with the "impeachment" process to get a common ground in which during the growing perception that the dismissal of the Head of the Regional Council is the mechanism by "impeachment", a mechanism to suspend the prosecution of public officials from office that developed in the federal state. This study examined the juridical-normative approach. In addition, this study also uses juridical-historical and juridical-comparative. The method used in the study are normative legal research methods and empirical legal research methods as well but, in this study is more focused on normative legal research, while empirical legal research serves as supporting information. Approach juridical-normative will be done by means of primary legal materials, legal materials secondary, tertiary and legal materials were analyzed using "syllogisms" and "interpretation". Meanwhile, empirical research in this study was done by collecting data through various discussions with the parties who have the competence and in-depth knowledge in the field of constitutional law.
The results showed that the developmental mechanism dismissal Regional Head amended from time to time. During its development, the current mechanism is present in the provisions of "Act Number 32 of 2004 on Regional Government" is not a mechanism of "impeachment" because decentralization created in Indonesia is "decentralized executive", resulting in the dismissal process does not involve the legislature, but the policy-making body, known by the term "council" in the English country which is similar to the role "DPRD" in Indonesia today. In addition, the mechanism of "Dismissal Regional Head by (DPRD/Council)" has not been regulated in detail in the Local Government Act today, including in the case of proceedings in the Supreme Court. Therefore, to ensure fairness, expediency and legal certainty, in case if the revision of the Local Government Act mechanism "Dismissal Regional Head by (DPRD/Council)" shall be regulated in more detail in the Act."
Jakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2014
T39221
UI - Tesis Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
<<   1 2   >>