AbstrakTindak pidana illegal logging/penebangan liar menunjukan adanya suatu rangkaian kegiatan yang merupakan suatu mata rantai yang saling terkait, mulai dari sumber atau prosedur kayu illegal atau yang melakukan penebangan kayu secar illegal hingga ke konsumen atau pengguna bahan baku kayu. Kayu tersebut melalui proses penyaringan yang illegal, pengangkutan illegal dan proses eksport atau penjualan yang illegal. Proses penebangan liar ini, dalam perkembangannya semakin nyata terjadi dan sering kali kayu-kayu illegal hasil dari penebangan yang liar itu dicuci (dilegalkan) terlebih dahulu sebelum memasuki pasar yang legal, artinya bahwa kayu-kayu pada hakekatnya adalah illegal, dilegalkan oleh pihak-pihak tertentu yang bekerja sama dengan oknum aparat, sehingga kayu-kayu tersebut memasuki pasar, maka sulit lagi diidentifikasi mana yang merupakan kayu illegal dan mana yang merupakan kayu legal. Upaya pencegahan telah dilakukan pemerintah untuk mem-berantas illegal logging yaitu telah membuat banyak kesepakatan dengan negara lain dalam upaya penegakan hukum terhadap illegal logging dan perdagangan illegal, seperti Inggris, Uni Eropa, RRC, Jepang dan Korea Selatan. Juga tidak kalah banyaknya adalah upaya LSM Internasional dan lembaga donor membantu Indonesia dalam memberantas illegal logging. Berbagai pertemuan telah dilakukan, namun senyatanya rencana-rencana aksi yang dibuat seringkali tidak menyelesaikan akar masalah. Sedangkan di dalam negeri, menurut Departemen Kehutanan, setidaknya ada 11 (sebelas) lembaga dan instansi pemerintah di Pusat yang menentukan upaya pemberantasan pembalakan liar tersebut, akan tetapi kerjasama kuratif yang bersifat polisionil tersebut tidaklah mudah mewujudkannya dalam pemberantasan illegal logging. Oleh karena itu tulisan ini diharapkan dapat menjadi sumbangan pemikiran bagi pengambil kebijakan baik di tingkat pusat maupun daerah.Kata Kunci: Penegakkan, Hukum, Illegal Loging, Harapan, Kenyataan. Abstract Illegal logging activities showed the presence of a series of activities that constitute a chain of interrelated , ranging from illegal timber sources or procedure or the conduct of illegal logging in abundance up to the consumer or user of wood raw material . The timber screening process is illegal, and the illegal transportation of export or sale is illegal . The logging process , the more real development going on and often times the result of illegal timber from illegal logging was washed ( legalized ) before entering the legal market , means that the timber is essentially illegal , legalized by the parties certain cooperate with local police officers , so that the timber enters the market , it is difficult to be identified which is a timber

The objective of research was to anticipate and to analyze the Farming Land Protection in Anticipating the Land Function Shift Due to Land Procurement for Development. The problem of farming land compensation is an urgent to organize recalling that land procurement cases for development occurs widely and results in reduced farming land leading to decreased food product. The research method employed in this research was juridical sociological one with descriptive approach. Considering the result of research: The construction toll road in Sragen Regency involved farming and non-farming lands. Compensation was so far given in the form of money, cash and carry, corresponding to the agreement between land procurement committee and land owner. The sustainable food farming land policy was accommodated through local legal instrument, Local Regulation Number 11 of 2011 about Spatial Layout of Sragen Regency Area in 2011-2031, within which there was farming allocation area. The local Government of Sragen Regency should make policy on sustainable food farming land control.

This article aimed to observe the safety protection of public road transportation and some public areas in Yogyakarta and Surakarta. The Road and urban public transport terminals, station, and transshipment centres were mainly established at the meeting points of different traffic lines. If we compare the terror-threat against infrastructure, building, and vehicles, then we can see that much more terrorist attacks were directed against the vehicles, than against bridges or tunnels. Safety protection on public road transportation and its public areas is one of the efforts to enforce right to life and right to sustain life in line with article 28A of Indonesian Constitution of 1945. This issue is important to be observed because two cities are prone to be attacked by terrorist and sometimes passengers or visitors are not responsive to disasters as long as they are on public road transportation and public areas. This article have two important problem to be observed, first problem is how already passengers or visitors of public road transportation and its public areas understand safety procedures of those areas?; second problem is how policy of safety protection need to be enforced on two public road transportation and public areas in order to protect right to life safely of passengers? The normative and empirical legal research is used to this research by using interviews and field observation. The result of this research concisely state that at this time the bus station and rail station is still not implemented maximum safety and security procedures to passengers and passengers or visitors do not understand about safety procedures and are not responsive to dangerous circumtances surrounded them. Maximum safety protection is important to prevent terrorism crime, narcoticss crime, and prevent any casualties due disasters. Security officers should check the condition of bags and luggage of passengers or visitors in order to prevent any threats there. Safety briefing is also implemented to keep a passengers concer.

No abstract

There is a government program for the poor in the COVID-19 pandemic situation. People who receive assistance have the right to control as a form of transparency (Law 14 of 2008 concerning Openness of Public Information) so that people are not just objects. The public generally plays a preventive role in overcoming corruption. However, the judge's decision has not been touched on the Crime of Corruption (Tindak Pidana Korupsi, TIPIKOR). Especially when the community members are in a position as "victims." Cases of social assistance (Bantuan Sosial, BANSOS) and direct cash assistance (Bantuan Langsung Tunai, BLT) can be examples of how citizens are people who have a disadvantaged position of rights due to corrupt behavior so that they "can" become victims of corruption. This research seeks to make an innovation in law enforcement. In law enforcement of corruption criminal acts, if the perpetrator has been proven guilty, the judge will generally sentence them in the form of a loss of independence, a fine, and an additional penalty in the form of criminal compensation for the loss to the state as much as the one that has been corrupted. In addition, criminals often encounter difficulties and obstacles in collecting them. Fines and additional penalties in the form of corrupted returns must be deposited into the state treasury according to the legislation. At this point, mainly for corruption cases related to social assistance to the people, the people become "victims." Why become "victims" because they have the right to get it? Because it has been stipulated in a decision, people are entitled to receive assistance from the government. For this reason, it is necessary to be given access to prosecute perpetrators for recovering the amount of assistance they should have received. The claim is based on the binding rights and obligations that must be carried out. This demand can be in the form of restitution because the people who should have received the aid did not receive it, but it was reduced. So that people can be positioned as victims. An alternative pattern of settlement by involving the victim (beneficiary), such as social assistance, will be more equitable because it will provide access to people who have been formatted as objects of sufferers. This alternative solution involving the receiving community has never been seen before. Because so far, the public can participate in law enforcement only as providers of information and reports of alleged criminal acts of corruption. This alternative is a construction of law enforcement expected to provide justice for the community. The method uses a socio-legal research approach. Research locations in Semarang and Yogyakarta. Structured interviews do primary data, and secondary data is case studies. Data analysis was carried out employing content analysis. The research urgency: (1) to overcome the problem of non-cash social assistance, which so far has caused the "victim" of the community, which is consistently formatted as an object, (2). overcome injustice by seeking a balance between services closer to justice and community welfare.Keywords: Victims, Corruption, Restitution.AbstrakTerdapat program pemerintah untuk rakyat miskin dalam situasi pandemi covid 19. Masyarakat yang mendapat bantuan mempunyai hak mengontrol sebagai wujud transparansi (UU 14 Tahun 2008 tentang Keterbukaan Informasi Publik) sehingga rakyat tidak sekedar sebagai obyek. Masyarakat umumnya berperan secara preventif dalam penanggulangan tindak pidana korupsi. Namun dalam putusan hakim belum tersentuh dalam kaitannya dengan putusan hakim TIPIKOR. Utamanya ketika warga masyarakat dalam posisi sebagai “korban”. Kasus bantuan sosial (BANSOS) dan bantuan langsung tunai (BLT) dapat menjadi contoh bagaimana warga masyarakat adalah orang yang mempunyai posisi terugikan haknya akibat perilaku koruptif sehingga “dapat” menjadi korban tindak pidana korupsi. Penelitian ini berupaya melakukan inovatif dalam penegakan hukum. Dalam penegakan hukum tindak pidana korupsi, apabila terhadap pelaku telah terbukti bersalah umumnya dijatuhi putusan oleh hakim berupa pidana hilang kemerdekaan, pidana denda dan pidana tambahan berupa pidana pengganti kerugian terhadap negara sebesar yang telah dikorupsi. Untuk pidana tambahan sering menemui kesulitan dan hambatan untuk menagihnya. Pidana denda dan pidana tambahan berupa pengembalian yang dikorupsi sesuai perundang-undangan harus disetorkan ke kas negara. Pada titik inilah utamanya untuk kasus korupsi yang berkaitan dengan bantuan sosial kepada rakyat, maka rakyat menjadi “korban.” Mengapa menjadi “korban’ karena mereka telah berhak untuk mendapatkan karena telah ditetapkan dalam suatu keputusan sebagai orang yang berhak untuk mendapatkan bantuan dari pemerintah. Untuk itulah perlu diberi akses melakukan penuntutan kepada pelaku untuk memulihkan besaran bantuan yang seharusnya mereka terima. Tuntutan tersebut didasarkan pada ikatan hak dan kewajiban yang musti dilakukan. Tuntutan ini dapat berupa restitusi karena rakyat yang seharusnya menerima bantuan ternyata tidak menerima atau menerima namun dikurangi. Sehingga rakyat dapat diposisikan sebagai korban. Suatu alternatif pola penyelesaian dengan melibatkan pihak korban (penerima bantuan) seperti bantuan sosial ini akan lebih berkeadilan karena akan memberi akses pada masyarakat yang selama ini diformat sebagai obyek penderita. Alternatif penyelesaian yang melibatkan masyarakat penerima ini belum pernah terjadi. Karena selama ini masyarakat dapat berperan serta dalam penegakan hukum sekedar pemberi informasi dan laporan dugaan tindak pidana korupsi. Alternatif ini merupakan konstruksi penegakan hukum yang diharapkan memberikan keadilan bagi masyarakat.Metode dengan pendekatan sosio-legal riset. Lokasi penelitian di Semarang dan Yogyakarta. Data primer dilakukan dengan wawancara terstruktur, data sekunder studi kasus. Analisis data dilakukan secara analisis isi. Urgensi penelitian: (1) mengatasi persoalan bantuan sosial non tunai yang selama ini telah menimbulkan “korban” masyarakat yang senantiasa diformat sebagai obyek, (2). mengatasi ketidakadilan dengan mencari keseimbangan antara pelayanan yang mendekatkan pada keadilan dan kesejahteraan masyarakat.Kata kunci: Korban, Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Restitusi.