Criticism of the ius constitutum of Indonesia which is still not organized according to the appropriate grading and grundnorm has resulted in a reconstruction of the arrangement of the ius constitutum. The purpose of this paper is to reconstruct the arrangement of the constitutum ius which is spread in various scientific papers by the author. The method used is a qualitative method with a descriptive approach. The conclusion was that efforts had been made to rearrange the ius constitutum, however, if it was not carried out in a focused and thorough manner, there would not be a single national legal system that was unique and suited to the Indonesian situation. The necessity of realizing a national legal system is not just a dream.

This paper focuses on the phenomenon of The Republic of Indonesia's democracy in perspective of the lawmaking process. Democracy means 'rule by the demos', demos standing for 'the many' or 'the people.' There are two contrasting models of democracy: direct democracy and representative democracy. According to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, that amended fourth times that is of 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002, Indonesia used a representative democracy model to make a law. The purpose of research, the theoretically is to know that the Republic of Indonesia is not full as a democratic state, but the practice is that the Republic of Indonesia is the unique democratic state. This study uses the grounded research method, which is based on fact, and inductive analysis. Findings reveal that the Council of Representatives of the Regions (DPD) has limited authority to propose and discuss the bill, and after the decision of the Constitutional Court 92/2012, DPD participated in the discussion level 2 (Second Reading), however, the DPD role does not come to participate in approving a bill. The theoretically, that

<p>Sampai saat ini terdapat banyak alat (tools) untuk menganalisis peraturan perundang-undangan, antara lain model RIA, model ROCCIPI, model RegMap, model MAPP dan lain-lain. Namun demikian masing-masing model tersebut mempunyai kelemahan. Untuk itu diperlukan model alterna Ɵ f yang lebih efek Ɵ f. Hal inilah yang mendorong untuk diadakan peneli Ɵ an Research and Development (R&amp;D), yakni rangkaian proses atau langkah-langkah dalam rangka mengembangkan suatu produk baru atau menyempurnakan produk yang telah ada agar dapat dipertanggungjawabkan. Peneli Ɵ an menghasilkan produk berupa model baru yang terdiri dari Rule, A ff air of Religion, Capacity, Hour, Material, dan Technik. Model ini merupakan alat yang dapat digunakan untuk menguji peraturan perundang-undangan yang sudah ada, dan juga sekaligus untuk mem- fi lter peraturan perundang-undangan yang akan dibuat.</p><p>There are a lot of tools to analyze the rules and regula Ɵ ons, including RIA model, ROCCIPI model, RegMAP model, MAPP model and others. However, each model has a drawback. Therefore need another e ff ec Ɵ ve alterna Ɵ ve model. It push the writer to make a research by Research and Development method, which is a series of processes or steps in order to develop a new product or improving an exis Ɵ ng product in order to be accounted for. The product of this research is a new model consis Ɵ ng of a Rule, A ff air of Religion, Capacity, Hour, Materials, and Technical. This model is a tool that can be used to test the rule and regula Ɵ on that already exist, and also to fi lter the rule and regula Ɵ on will be made.</p>

Lembaga anti rasuah di Indonesia (KPK) dengan struktur yang ada, telah melakukan berbagai cara, baik untuk pemberantasan maupun pencegahan korupsi di Indonesia. Upaya di bidang penindakan mengalami peningkatan pada tahun berikutnya. Usaha keras menghapus dan mencegah korupsi oleh KPK patut mendapatkan apresiasi. IPK Indonesia tahun 2018 naik sedikit hingga mencapai 38, namun jika dilihat dari perspektif tingkstan, maka negara Indonesia yang masih di angka 89, dengan nilai kosong (0) adalah negara yang paling korup dan nilai seratur (100)merupakan negara  yang dipersepsikan tidak melakukan korupsi, maka masih perlu untuk di tingkatkan. Berbagai cara harus dilakukan untuk memberantas dan mencegah korupsi di Indonesia, baik melalui jalur penegakan peraturan, jalur penegakan etika (moral dan iman), jaluir pendidikan dan jalur sosio-kultural. Hanya dengan segala upaya dan semangat juang yang tinggi, Indonesia segera terbebas dari korupsi.

Compensation in Article 77 KUHAP is regulated further PP No. 27 of 1983 has been amended PP No. 92 of 2015. Amount of compensation in PP No. 92 of 2015 has increased, however, the impression of injustice cannot be eliminated considering that in various instances the amount of compensation is not in accordance with the magnitude of the loss that actually occurred by the victim. The problem is policy of revised PP 92 of 2015 on components and the amount of compensation ideally. The purpose of this study is to find out and analyze the policy of revised PP 92 of 2015. This study used normative and sociological methods with qualitative approaches. This study used secondary and primary data. The results of the study: 1. The component of compensation: Returns to its original state; To bear the costs incurred to restore to its original state, in the form of serious injuries and minor injuries; Providing certain compensation in the event that it cannot be returned to its original state; Provide compensation for the loss of opportunity that should be obtained. 2. The amount of compensation is adjusted to the components. Recommended that the judge determine the amount of the loss, so the victim does not need to file a claim for compensation.