Article 30 paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution states that the Indonesian National Police as an instrument of the state that maintains security and public order has the duty to protect, protect, serve the community and uphold the law. The formulation of the problem is the mechanism for dishonorably dismissing members of the Police who are involved in the crime of narcotics abuse and the purpose of this study is to find out and analyze the mechanism for the legal process for members of the Police who commit crimes of narcotics abuse in terms of Perkap No. 14 of 2011 concerning the code of ethics for the police profession of the Republic of Indonesia. The type of research carried out includes empirical legal research with a qualitative approach. Based on the results of the research and discussion it can be concluded that members of the Police who commit narcotics crimes must be held accountable for their actions, law enforcement against members of the Police who commit narcotics abuse applies equally to everyone in the eyes of the law.

No abstract

The problems in this research are: a juridical review of the completion of the Notary code of ethics in Samarinda City and the obstacles and solutions to the completion of the Notary code of ethics in Samarinda City. The method used by researchers is a juridical empirical legal approach and the specifications in this study include descriptive analytical. The source and type of data of this research are primary data obtained from field studies by interviewing a notary in Samarinda City. Notaries who commit errors against ethics, appropriateness or moral solutions not only according to the code of ethics alone but also based on statutory regulations. Everything that is not allowed to be done by a notary clearly and is regulated in the regulations. Obstacles in the process of completing the Notary code of ethics in Samarinda City are the large number of Notaries, with a large working area, a lack of awareness of Notaries to comply with the code of ethics, and the provision that the Notary receives is not sufficient while attending education, and overlapping provisions of the code of ethics supervision between the Honorary Council and the Notary Supervisory Council. Meanwhile, for the Supervisory Council, namely the unavailability of a representative secretariat, lack of budget funds to carry out optimal supervision and guidance, lack of government attention / concern, and weak morals/ behavior of Notaries in implementing UUJN and the Notary's Code of Ethics.

No abstract

No abstract