People who follow Marc Ancel's theory of criminal policy say that mass media is one way to keep people from getting into trouble. It turns out, though, that when it comes to child crimes, the media has an impact on how many crimes happen. Mass media has been shown to have an effect on children's development, so this is a good thing. A child may have a strong desire to do bad things because of pictures, readings, and movies. It's important to look at one part of social policy that deals with public mental health problems (social hygiene), both as individuals in the community and as parents and caregivers. This includes both the well-being of children and adolescents and the community as a whole.Keywords: Integral Penal Policy; Non-Penal Policy; Child Crime AbstrakSebenarnya apabila memperhatikan teori kebijakan kriminal yang dikemukakan oleh marc Ancel, mass media adalah salah satu sarana yang digunakan untuk melakukan pencegahan kejahatan. Namun dalam kaitan kejahatan anak, mass media justru berpengaruh terhadap timbulnya suatu kejahatan. Hal ini dibenarkan karena mass media dipahami berpengaruh pula terhadap perkembangan anak. Keinginan atau kehendak anak untuk melakukan kejahatan kadangkala timbul karena pengaruh gambar-gambar, bacaan dan film. Salah satu aspek kebijakan sosial yang patut mendapat perhatian ialah penggarapan masalah kesehatan jiwa masyarakat (social hygiene), baik secara individual sebagai anggota masyarakat maupun kesejahteraan keluarga termasuk kesejahteraan anak dan remaja serta masyarakat luas pada umumnya.Kata Kunci: Integral Penal Policy; Non Penal Policy; Kejahatan Anak

The purpose of this study is to examine the legal certainty afforded to community organizations that commit extortion, as well as to analyze and propose criminal punishments against community organizations that commit extortion. The method utilized in this study is normative legal research, which is conducted in order to elicit the relevant data for the topic. The data used are secondary data and tertiary legal materials. The data analysis was conducted utilizing a qualitative method of legal analysis. According to the findings of this study, the government must be resolute in enforcing the law against a person who is a member and/or administrator of a community organization and who intentionally and directly or indirectly violates the provisions, including extortion, violence, and disturbing the peace and order. destroying public and social facilities, committing acts of hostility against ethnicity, religion, race, or class; engaging in separatist activities that jeopardize the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia's sovereignty; and adhering to, developing, and spreading teachings or understandings contrary to Pancasila. To ensure legal certainty for a person acting in conformity with existing legal provisions, Community Organizations are not an exception; on the contrary, Community Organizations lack legal certainty. Articles of extortion and threats as defined in Article 368 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code (KUHP) criminal sanctions imposed on individual Ormas who commit the extortion crime specified in Article 368 of the Criminal Code still do not satisfy the community's sense of justice because the threats are only 9 (nine) years in prison, with no fines or other additional penalties to the organization concerned.

One of the basic objectives of eradicating corruption in Indonesia is to restore state losses. However, the retributive justice paradigm which is the legal basis for eradicating corruption and criminalizing corruption is not relevant to the main objective of corruption eradication law in Indonesia. What is even more important in the spirit of eradicating corruption, namely the return of state losses, is only an additional crime that can also be replaced by imprisonment. This article is intended to examine the concept of punishment for perpetrators of corruption that is relevant to be applied in Indonesia in accordance with what is required by law by considering the current development of the nation and state. The study focuses on deepening the elaboration of the concept of restorative justice to maximize the return of state finances in convicting perpetrators of corruption in Indonesia. By using normative juridical research methods, this study concludes that the concept of restorative justice in punishing perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption can be implemented in the form of strengthening norms for returning state losses from being an additional crime to being a principal crime. As for anticipating the perpetrators being unable to pay the losses, the concept of forced labour can be applied instead of imprisoning the perpetrators of corruption.Keywords: Restorative Justice; Ultimum Remedium; State Finance; Legal Benefits; SentencingAbstrakSalah satu tujuan dasar dari pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia adalah untuk mengembalikan kerugian negara. Namun paradigma retributif justice yang menjadi landasan hukum pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi serta pemidanaan pelaku korupsi tidak relevan dengan tujuan utama hukum pemberantasan korupsi di Indonesia. Hal yang justru penting dalam semangat pemberantasan korupsi yakni pengembalian kerugian negara justru hanya menjadi pidana tambahan yang juga dapat diganti oleh pidana penjara. Artikel ini dimaksudkan untuk meneliti konsep pemidanaan pelaku tindak pidana korupsi yang relevan untuk diterapkan di Indonesia sesuai dengan yang dikehendaki oleh undang-undang dengan mempertimbangkan perkembangan kehidupan bangsa dan negara dewasa ini. Kajian terfokus pada pendalaman mengelaborasi konsep restoratif justice untuk memaksimalkan pengembalian keuangan negara dalam pemidanaan pelaku korupsi di Indonesia. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif, kajian ini menyimpulkan bahwa konsep restoratif justice dalam pemidanaan pelaku tindak pidana korupsi dapat diimplementasikan dalam bentuk penguatan norma-norma pengembalian kerugian negara dari sebagai pidana tambahan menjadi pidana pokok. Adapun untuk mengantisipasi pelaku tidak mampu membayar kerugian tersebut, maka konsep kerja paksa dapat terapkan ketimbang memenjarakan pelaku tindak pidana korupsi.Kata Kunci: Restoratif Justice; Ultimum Remedium; Keuangan Negara; Kemanfaatan Hukum; Pemidanaan

Landowners affected by land acquisition initiatives in the public interest, especially for the government's benefit, frequently have trouble receiving compensation, as government and private sector property purchases are common. On the land, there was an overlapping ownership dispute, which delayed the land acquisition because it had to be resolved in court. This study's objective is to examine and appraise techniques for resolving overlapping land ownership disputes and the legal certainty of property rights for which land acquisition is to be done. The author uses normative and empirical legal methods in this study. Because normative legal research focuses on law or norms, the author uses a normative technique. Rules include legal principles, value rules, and legal restrictions. Legally normative study involves legal theory, the legal system, and vertical and horizontal synchronization. Due to overlapping land ownership generated by the buying and selling of land rights, the legal certainty of land rights for which land acquisition is to be done has not been adequately accomplished. The Camat who served as PPAT in the aforementioned case acquired the same block of land, which was not in the public's best interest.

Juridically, Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics is a legislative product produced in order to provide certainty in law enforcement for narcotics crime. The substance of this law regulates the criminal act of narcotics, which is about prohibited or permissible acts accompanied by criminal threats if the prohibition is violated. However, in the current practice of criminal justice there are problems related to legal certainty for the implementation of the narcotics law, because it turns out that the convictions made by judges against the accused of narcotics crime are not in line with the narcotics law. The imposition of crimes below the special minimum limit by the judge is very contrary to the provisions of Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics so that this creates legal uncertainty which has implications for the effectiveness of law enforcement on narcotics crime in Indonesia.Keywords: Special Minimum Crime, Narcotics Crime AbstrakSecara yuridis, Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika merupakan produk legislatif yang dihasilkan dalam rangka memberikan kepastian dalam penegakan hukum tindak pidana narkotika. Substansi undang-undang tersebut mengatur mengenai tindak pidana narkotika, yakni tentang perbuatan yang dilarang atau dibolehkan yang disertai ancaman pidana apabila larangan tersebut dilanggar. Namun dalam praktik peradilan pidana saat ini terdapat permasalahan terkait dengan kepastian hukum atas pelaksanaan undang-undang narkotika, karena ternyata putusan-putusan pemidanaan yang diputuskan oleh hakim kepada terdakwa tindak pidana narkotika tidak sejalan dengan undang-undang narkotika. Adanya penjatuhan pidana di bawah batas minimum khusus oleh hakim sangat bertentangan dengan ketentuan Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika sehingga hal ini menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum yang berimplikasi pada efektifitas penegakan hukum tindak pidana narkotika di Indonesia.Kata Kunci: Pidana Minimum Khusus, Tindak Pidana Narkotika