No abstract

Purpose of the study: This research article aims to explain the analysis of several reasons for the judge's decision which is considered to lighten the defendant in corruption cases in Indonesia.  Methodology: This study used a normative research method with a philosophical approach. Results: The results of this study indicate that judges continue to impose light sanctions on state officials who are accused of corruption cases for various reasons that can be taken into consideration. The following is an analysis of some of these reasons: have never been punished; be honest and be kind; have family responsibilities; refund corrupted money; incorrect application of the law; have no authority; motivated by other people; have a sense of justice; serve the community; get public scorn; and refrain from engaging in corrupt behavior. Applications of this study: Theoretically, academics can use this research to add and develop their knowledge of the law. As for practitioners, especially judges, this research can be used as material for conclusions and considerations when making decisions in corruption cases, so that efforts to eradicate corruption can definitely be achieved. Novelty/Originality of this study: The corruption issue in Indonesia is influenced by the judge's decision in addition to the country’s bad bureaucratic culture. The low judge's decision on corruption cases can also affect the number of state officials who commit acts of corruption. Several reasons that could influence the judge's decision to reduce the corruptors’ sentences. In order to find a true legal truth, it would be useful to study the judge’s reasoning for reducing the corruptor’s punishment because the judge's decision is the most decisive stage in the legal status and fate of the defendant. This is why it is critical to do a more in-depth review of the law in order to ensure that it continues to operate as intended

Purpose of Study: This research aimed at analyzing Supreme Court Decision No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 and Supreme Court Decision No. 2686/Pdt/1985 concerning cumulative lawsuits and tort according to the judge's legal reasoning.  Methodology: This is library research using the normative juridical method. The approach used was the statutory approach. The statutory approach was carried out by analyzing Supreme Court Decision No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 and Supreme Court Decision No. 2686/Pdt/1985 in the context of the cumulative lawsuit and tort section. Result: This research found that even though unlawful acts and contracts are conventionally separated, there are still issues regarding overlapping understandings of the concepts of tort, cumulative lawsuit, and default in law. For example, there is an act by one party that, on the one hand, can be classified as an unlawful act, but it also has a contractual element. Similarly, one party’s actions have contractual consequences for the other party, but they can also result in liability based on tort. This condition causes several parties to accumulate lawsuits for unlawful acts and defaults at the same time. Supreme Court accepted the cumulative lawsuit in decision No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 and Supreme Court Decision No. 2686/Pdt/1985, indicating that it does not violate procedural law. Applications of this study:  This research is useful for analyzing Supreme Court Decision No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 and Supreme Court Decision No. 2686/Pdt/1985. These Supreme Court decisions have a ratio decidendi or jurisprudence that a cumulative lawsuit is permitted and it does not violate procedural law. Novelty: There are no previous researchers who conducted a legal analysis of the Supreme Court's decision, even though the Supreme Court is the jurisprudence in cases or legal issues of cumulative lawsuits and tort.   Keywords: Cumulation, Against the Law, Default, Decision, Ratio Decidendi  ABSTRAK  Tujuan: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 2686/Pdt/1985 tentang gugatan kumulatif dan perbuatan melawan hukum menurut penalaran hukum hakim.  Metodologi: Penelitian kepustakaan ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif. Pendekatan yang digunakan adalah pendekatan Perundang-undangan. Pendekatan perundang-undangan dilakukan dengan menganalisis Putusan MA No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 dan Putusan MA No. 2686/Pdt/1985 dalam konteks gugatan kumulatif dan pasal perbuatan melawan hukum.  Hasil: Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa meskipun perbuatan melawan hukum dan perjanjian dipisahkan secara konvensional, masih terdapat permasalahan mengenai tumpang tindih pemahaman tentang konsep gugatan, gugatan kumulatif, dan wanprestasi dalam hukum. Misalnya, ada perbuatan salah satu pihak yang di satu pihak dapat digolongkan sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum, tetapi juga mengandung unsur perjanjian. Demikian pula, tindakan satu pihak memiliki konsekuensi kontraktual bagi pihak lain, tetapi tindakan tersebut juga dapat mengakibatkan pertanggungjawaban berdasarkan kesalahan. Kondisi ini menyebabkan beberapa pihak menumpuk tuntutan atas perbuatan melawan hukum dan wanprestasi secara bersamaan. Mahkamah Agung menerima gugatan kumulatif dalam putusan No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 dan Putusan MA No. 2686/Pdt/1985, yang berarti tidak melanggar hukum acara.  Aplikasi penelitian ini: Penelitian ini berguna untuk menganalisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 575 K/Pdt/1983 dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 2686/Pdt/1985. Putusan Mahkamah Agung ini memiliki ratio decidendi atau yurisprudensi bahwa gugatan kumulatif diperbolehkan dan tidak melanggar hukum acara.  Kebaruan/Orisinalitas: Belum ada peneliti terdahulu yang melakukan analisis hukum terhadap putusan MA, padahal MA merupakan yurisprudensi dalam perkara atau permasalahan hukum kumulatif gugatan dan perbuatan melawan hukum. Kata kunci: Kumulasi, Melawan Hukum, Wanprestasi, Putusan, Rasio Decidendi

Le viol fait partie d'un crime sexuel dont la preuve est assez compliquée si la victime ne se présente pas immédiatement ou si les responsables de l'application des lois ne le traitent pas rapidement. Visum et repertum est un rapport d'aspect médical rédigé par un médecin à la demande écrite des autorités répressives aux fins d'enquête et d'examen des affaires plus tard devant les tribunaux, de sorte que visum et repertum ne peut être soumis que par les forces de l'ordre ou des autorités telles que la police, les procureurs, ou un juge de la cour à un médecin spécial qui s'occupe du terrain, le procureur et le juge demandent qu'un autopsie soit faite par la police.Cette étude utilise une méthode doctrinale normative, le résultat de la recherche est que le processus de prouver le viol en tant que crime sexuel présente des différences et des difficultés qui sont différentes des autres affaires pénales générales, car des preuves sont nécessaires sous la forme de visum et repertum qui révéleront les auteurs et le moment de l'incident pour faciliter la recherche et déterminer les auteurs de ces actes, le problème de visum et repertum est la preuve dépend des croyances des juges, comme d'autres preuves la position de visum et repertum est la même que la preuve documentaire en termes de force, mais l'obstacle est la culture en Indonésie qui fait que les victimes de viol ne signalent pas ou ne signalent pas mais en la période écoulée, ce qui rend difficile la post mortem elle-même.

The Javanese tradition of avoiding marriage in the month of Suro is highly upheld, especially by the community. It is widely believed that marriage in the month of Suro will bring danger to the bride and groom, whereas in the Islamic concept, there is no prohibition against marriage in the month of Suro (Muharram). Departing from these reasons, the purpose of this study is to describe two different views of Islamic teachings and Javanese cultural traditions that have continued to contradict each other from ancient times to the present. This research is set in Ponorogo Regency, East Java. The research method used is qualitative with a sociological empirical juridical approach. The primary data used are facts about human behaviour and written documents from traditional leaders, religious leaders and related people. Using interviews and documentation for data collection, then analyzed using sociological empirical juridical. The results of the study show that the philosophical meaning of the prohibition of marriage in the month of Suro that occurs in Javanese society, especially in Ponorogo Regency, can be divided into two sides based on Paul Ricoeur's theory, namely the meaning of the prohibition from the side of the text maker and the side of the recipient/reader of the text. From the perspective of these two sides, then the philosophical meaning contained in the tradition of prohibiting marriage in the month of Suro can be concluded as a syncretism meaning between Javanese religions and cultures.