<p>Sebagaimana diketahui di dalam Pasal 8 ayat 1 Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2001 tentang Paten menyebutkan bahwa Paten diberikan untuk jangka waktu selama 20 (dua puluh) tahun terhitung sejak Tanggal Penerimaan dan jangka waktu itu tidak dapat diperpanjang. Jangka waktu perlindungan paten yang berlaku selama 20 tahun tersebut, pada prinsipnya bertujuan agar setelah melebihi masa 20 tahun maka penemuan teknologi tersebut dapat dimiliki oleh masyarakat dengan di produksi secara masal sehingga hilanglah hak penemu untuk menikmati hasil temuannya secara ekonomi. Hal ini disebabkan karena pengakuan rezim HaKI terhadap hak paten khususnya, tidak lain adalah untuk menghargai kreatifitas ide intelektual Inventor dan tentunya untuk kepentingan umum demi kemajuan ilmu pengetahuan dan teknologi. Namun demikian, pada prakteknya perlindungan Hak Paten selama masa 20 tahun terlampau lama sehingga menimbulkan dampak penemuan teknologi tersebut tidak lagi dapat menjadi milik umum karena perkembangan teknologi masa kini tidak memerlukan waktu yang lama untuk melahirkan sebuah invensi baru. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa bentuk perlindungan hak paten di Indonesia saat ini masih mengacu pada ketentuan Pasal 8 ayat (1) dan Pasal 9 Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2001 tentang Paten yaitu jangka waktu perlindungan hukum untuk paten biasa selama 20 (dua puluh) tahun dan paten sederhana selama 10 (sepuluh) tahun, dan pengaturan perlindungan hak paten di Indonesia perlu dilakukan deregulasi karena berdasarkan fakta di lapangan, jangka waktu perlindungan hukum sebagaimana Pasal 8 ayat (1) dan Pasal 9 Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2001 tentang Paten terlalu lama sehingga tujuan perlindungan Paten agar teknologi dapat menjadi milik umum tidak tercapai.</p><p>People participation in the generale election is a parameter of the democracy development. This research is intended to analyze the people participation in the 2014 election by taking case in the Godong subdistrict, Grobogan Regency, Central Jawva. The results showed that the rate of Public Participation in the Use of Voting Rights in the 2014 legislative elections in District Godong Grobogan this time slightly increased in comparison to the legislative elections in 2009, from 67% to 69%. In choosing a political party because the people chose not fanatical on a political party, but as seen from the achievements and performance of the leaders or members who are in a political party. The high urban communities in the District Godong also be the cause of the high rate of abstention. An abstention human rights, but if the people can not vote because not registered as Permanent Voters List is a violation of human rights, as has removed political rights as citizens are entitled to vote. Conclusions of this study is the level of community participation in the use of voting rights in the 2014 legislative elections in District Godong Grobogan slightly increased when compared to the 2009 legislative elections.</p>
Indonesia election in 2019 attracted great attention, began a large humanity event where 554 general election officers who passed away to spend a large budget to hold the elections Simultaneously of 2.4 trillion. Elections in Indonesia are organized using conventional methods, namely by striking or contrard of voice mail that complicate voters and electoral officers in counting voice mail. As a comparison of developed countries such as the United States have leverages the electronic collaboration voting and the Internet as a medium for the public to vote and the media counting the voice mail for electoral officers so that the elections there Practically only takes time, energy, and budget ideally. The presence of the Internet as a trigger part of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 need to be addressed by the Government as a medium for the retrieval and counting of voice mail and voice counting so that the human tragedy and waste of state budget can be minimized in Electoral organization. Through the ruling Constitutional Court Verdict No. 147/PUU-VII/2009 is the best juridical road to the general elections utilizing the 4.0 Industrial Revolution. Hopefully, this research can open the way of mind for the implementation of the elections in Indonesia.
The high need for financing in the future has caused Indonesia's Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) level to stagnate, the ratio to GDP must remain under control, due to the increasingly limited financing capacity of SOEs. The gap between domestic funding capabilities and national infrastructure financing needs encourages governments to seek strong legal and institutional strategic partners through the establishment of Investment Management Institutions (LPI). This study aims to : 1) Describe the conditions of Indonesia's investment climate before the establishment of the Investment Management Institution (LPI); 2) Assessing expectations regarding the increase in Indonesia's investment ilkim after the establishment of the Investment Management Institution (LPI). This study uses a library research method with a normative research approach with qualitative analysis, which describes various arrangements regarding the investment climate in Indonesia before and after the existence of LPI. The finding is that the condition of Indonesia's investment climate before the establishment of the LPI was strongly influenced by the COVID-19 virus pandemic which caused our JCI to decline to below the 4000 level. The establishment of the Indonesia Investment Management Authority (LPI) or Indonesia Investment Authority (INA) is a new hope for efforts to increase investment in Indonesia. After the LPI was formed, it was followed by the formation of the Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF). Where this SWF has also been owned by developed countries, such as the United Arab Emirates, China, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Kuwait, and Qatar. It has been able to improve Indonesia's investment performance. It was noted that despite the Covid-19 pandemic, investment realization throughout 2020 reached IDR 826.3 trillion. This achievement is 1.1% higher than the investment target set at IDR 817.2 trillion.
Most treatments of people with mental disorders (ODGJ) are forced or involuntary care. Human rights ensure that persons with disabilities are entitled to enjoy independence based on equality with others. Deprivation of liberty is allowed only if it is lawful and is done without arbitrary. The criminal law has set a ban on the deprivation of independence if it meets all its elements. The study examined whether the forced treatment of people with mental disorders in Indonesia when analyzed, associated with deprivation of independence, is a violation of criminal law and human rights, and how harmonization with forced care regulations. The results of this study show that the deprivation of independence in forced care in health institutions does not meet the elements of unlawful acts because there are clear rules, while in non-health institutions there are no clear rules and there may be acts of deprivation of independence that need further research. Forced Care needs to be harmonized with the current Law, namely: Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Health; Law No. 18 of 2014 on Mental Health; and Law No. 8 of 2016 concerning Persons with Disabilities.
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.