Aside from going through the courts, there are alternatives that can be passed through the dispute, namely negotiation, mediation and arbitration. Arbitration institutions are bodies chosen by the parties to the dispute to provide decisions regarding certain disputes, these institutions can also provide a binding opinion of a legal relationship from matters that have not arisen yet. The formulation of the problem raised in this study is how this arrangement for dispute resolution of parties who have been bound in an arbitration agreement, as well as how the judges' legal considerations in resolving disputes in an arbitration agreement. This research is a normative legal research. Arrangement for dispute resolution of parties that have been bound in the arbitration agreement is contained in law number 30 of 1999 concerning arbitration and alternative dispute resolution, in which the dispute resolution is handed over by professional Arbitrators who will act as judges or private courts who will apply the procedure the way the peace law has been mutually agreed upon by the parties to arrive at a final and binding decision. Judge's Legal Considerations in the Case Verdict of the Denpasar District Court Class I A Number 3/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Dps. that is based on Article 3 of Law Number 30 of 1999 Concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, which states that the District Court is not authorized to adjudicate disputes of parties who have been bound in an arbitration agreement Selain melalui pengadilan, teruntuk mengatasi kasus sengketa ada suatu alternatif yang dapat dilalui, yaitu dengan cara negosiasi, mediasi, dan arbitrase. Lembaga arbitrase merupakan badan yang dipilih oleh para pihak yang bersengketa untuk memberikan putusan mengenai sengketa tertentu, lembaga tersebut juga dapat memberikan pendapat yang mengikat dari sebuah keterkaitan hukum dari hal yang belum timbul sengketa. Adapun rumusan masalah yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana ini pengaturan penyelesaian sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dalam perjanjian arbitrase, serta bagaimana pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam penyelesaian sengketa dalam perjanjian arbitrase. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normative. Pengaturan penyelesaian sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dalam perjanjian arbitrase yaitu terdapat pada undang-undang nomor 30 tahun 1999 tentang arbitarse dan alternatif penyelesaian sengketa umum, yang dimana penyelesaian sengketa tersebut diserahkan Arbiter yang profesional yang akan bertindak sebagai hakim atau peradilan swasta yang akan menerapkan tata cara hukum perdamaian yang telah disepakati bersama oleh para pihak tersebut untuk sampai pada putusan yang final dan mengikat. Pertimbangan Hukum Hakim Dalam Putusan Perkara Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar Kelas I A Nomor 3/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Dps. yaitu didasarkan pada Pasal 3 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase Dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa, yang menyatakan bahwa Pengadilan Negeri tidak berwenang untuk mengadili sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dalam perjanjian arbitrase.
The discussion in the writing of this thesis is a problem related to forced efforts as regulated in article 116 where in this article forced efforts (Dwangsom) are regulated. The purpose of implementing compulsory measures so that the decisions issued are carried out by those concerned. This study aims to determine the mechanism of forced attempts to officials who do not carry out the TUN Judicial Decision and to find out the obstacles to forced attempts against the TUN Judicial Decision. Normative legal research is used as a research method, which is a stage to find legal regulations, legal principles in order to answer the contents of the law in this thesis with a statutory approach, legal theory and a conceptual approach. Primary and secondary sources of legal materials are then analyzed to obtain conclusions and suggestions. The results showed that the efforts to force the decision, namely Dwangsom and administrative sanctions at the PTUN which had been incracht could not be implemented optimally. The obstacle in forced efforts related to the execution of the PTUN Decision is that there is no special agency tasked with implementing the decision, therefore the government has revised the PTUN Law and provisions relating to Forced Efforts issued by the Supreme Court so that it can be applied by the PTUN judge so that it can be applied and implemented optimally.
Hate speech in daily life people now such as expression, sedition, and provocation hate to other people and other community in many aspect such as religion, sex orientation, disabled, gender, racial , skin color, nationality and many else. If hate speech didn’t handle with effective way, efficient, and handle with corresponding with the valid law, so it can be impact social conflict that can increase discrimination action, violence and death loss. In this case there will be a bad impact which so danger for the hate speech victim, so in this case the writer’s get two solution to handle hate speech, that are protection law of hate speech victims and punishment criminal for the people who does hate speech. In this legal opinion writing, I am as a writer use normative method. In my experience, I do problem approach constitution which has related with hate speech, and then this research material reviewed. The result of this research is about law protective for the hate speech victims so that achievement can be protect them and the hate speech victims can feels safe. Hate speech can be says of criminal act because of what they have been done to hate speech victims. Unlawful actions that have been done with on propose or accidentally must be accounted for the acts that consist of constitution that happened and stated as acts that can be get a punishment in jail or fine. Ujaran kebencian dalam kehidupan manusia saat ini yang berupa ungkapan, hasutan, dan provokasi kebencian kepada seseorang atau suatu kelompok lain, dalam hal berbagai aspek berupa, agama, cacat, orientasi seksual, gender, ras, warna kulit, kewarganegaraan, dan lain-lain. Jika hate speech tidak di tangani dengan efektif, efesien dan ditangani sesuai hukum yang berlaku, bisa menimbulkan suatu dampak konflik sosial yang bisa memicu tindak diskriminasi, kekerasan dan atau penghilangan nyawa. Dengan timbulnya dampak yang sangat membahayakan bagi korban hate speech, maka penulis mendapatkan dua rumusan masalah dalam menangani hate speech yaitu, perlindungan hukum bagi korban hate speech dan sanksi pidana bagi pelaku hate speech. Penelitian ini mengunakan metode penulisan normative dan menggunakan pendekatan permasalahan perundang-undangan yang berkaitan dengan hate speech Kemudian bahan penelitian di kaji. Hasil dari penelitian berupa perlindungan hukum bagi korban hate speech supaya tercapainya rasa aman dan dapat melindungi bagi mereka yang menjadi korban hate speech. Hate speech dapat dikatakan sebagai tindak pidana karena telah melakukan suatu Tindakan melawan hukum yang dilakukan dengan sengaja ataupun dengan tidak sengaja harus dipertanggungkawabkan atas tindakannnya berdasarkan undang-undang yang berlaku dan dinyatakan sebagai tindakan yang dapat dihukum kurungan atau denda.
Defending one’s self in a forced state, or in the Criminal Code known as “forced defense” (Noodweer), arose as a result of a situation where a victim of an act of crime was in a coercive situation or state so as to be forced to carry out self-defense. A person becoming a victim of a crime has the space to make use of power and efforts to defend and save his/her possessions, honor, and soul. This research highlights two issues related to this. First, which type of crime is included in forced defense? Second, what is the legal basis for the elimination of criminal acts against a person doing self-defense in a coercive state in a crime? To uncover these issues, this research was conducted using the design and method of normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. The results show that the concept contained in Article 49 Paragraph 1, interpreted as a noodweer, aims to protect oneself and others, the honor of one’s own morality or property, which when compared to the criminal acts of robbery referred to as being clearly considered the noodweer. ln addition, the legal basis for the elimination of criminality against the act of noodweer is the legal conclusion resulted from the facts revealed at the trial and the values to uphold, that is, to appraise and understand the sense of justice living in the community according to the judge’s point of view. Based on this fact, noodweer and the basis for the elimination of criminal acts against self-defense if compared to related cases have been considered as noodweer in accordance with Article 49 Paragraph 1. Further research is expected to further broaden the scope or coverage of research on the self-defense.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.