Secara umum Pemilu diseluruh Indonesia dilaksanakan oleh komisi Pemilihan Umum tak terkecuali juga pembentukan Tim seleksi karena sesuai dengan amanat Undang-Undang tahun 1945 menyebutkan bahwa Pemilihan Umum dilaksanakan oleh suatu komisi Pemilihan Umum yang bersifat Nasional, tetap, dan mandiri. Undang-Undang nomor 15 Tahun 2011tentang penyelenggara pemilu menetapkan Anggota timsel berpendidikan paling rendah S-1 dan berusia paling rendah 30 (tiga puluh) tahun yang di bentuk oleh KPU Pusat. Berbeda dengan pola rekrutmen Penyelenggara di Aceh termasuk yang membentuk  Timsel yang tertuang didalam Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2006 tentang pemerintah Aceh Pasal 56 ayat (4) dan (5) dinyatakan bahwa anggota KIP Aceh diusulkan oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Aceh ( DPRA) dan ditetapkan oleh KPU dan diresmikan oleh Gubernur, selama pelaksanaan pemilu berlangsung ada sejumlah permasalahn diantaranya adalah Sumber daya Manusia (SDM). Studi ini mengkaji tentang Integritas komisi Independen Pemilihan (KIP)sebagai penyeleggara Pemilu di Aceh.Kata Kunci : Integritas Penyelenggara Pemilu, rekrutmen, tim seleksi

Disputes that often occur are usually related to ownership of land, this is because of the important role of land in human life, so that land becomes an object that is prone to disputes or disputes between people, this occurs because human needs for land are increasing, but the land supply is relatively fixed. Notary as a public official trusted by the community to resolve land disputes through a peace deed made by a notary to ensure legality. The method used is empirical juridical research. Research data were collected through field studies through interviews with resource persons to obtain primary data and literature studies to obtain primary data. The focus in this research is to find out and analyze the authority of a notary public in resolving land disputes with a deed of peace. The results showed that 1) Notary was authorized to make a peace deed to guarantee legal certainty for the parties to settle land disputes in accordance with article 15 Paragraph (2) letter f of the UUJN and 2) The peace deed drawn up by a Notary Public is an Authentic Deed but not final binding like a van dading deed decided from the results of mediation in court.

In Indonesia, a notary is one of the positions that provides services to the public in the inclusion of their wishes in written form. However, in reality, the role of the notary, in providing services in the civil sector, also often places them as a defendant or co-defendant in a case between the parties to the dispute. Thus, it raises the presumption that the notary is a party to the deed. The formulation of the problems in this study include: a) How is the legal effort for the notary who became a defendant in a civil case related to the deed he/she made? b) How is the strength of proof on the deed that the notary made? c) What efforts have been made by the notary to defend the deed he made? This study applies a sociological juridical approach. In addition, this study uses primary and secondary data in which they are analyzed qualitatively. The results of the study indicate that: 1) In the case of a notary who is also a defendant in a civil case, the provisions of Article 66 of the Law of Notary Position do not apply to him/her. So, in order to protect themselves and their positions in court, the notary may make several legal efforts. The first, before the verification phase in the court, is to make a claim of reconciliation. The second, after the decision of the panel of judges, is to make an ordinary legal effort; i.e. appeal to the High Court, appeal to the Supreme Court and review. Then, the effort of the resistance law (verzet) was carried out on the decision of the verstek. 2) The strength of proof of the notarial deed is divided into 3 (three) types, i.e. the strength of outward proof, the strength of formal proof, the strength of material proof. 3) Efforts made by the notary to defend the deed that he/she made are divided into 2 (two) types: first is before a lawsuit takes place in the court and second after a claim is made in court.

The objectives of this research are: 1) to know How the Verification of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building Made by Land Deed Official is;   2) to know How the Verification of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building by Office for Management of Finance and Regional Revenue towards inheritance is; 3) to know How Legal Consequence of Verification of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building by Office for Management of Finance and Regional Revenue towards trade contract. The approach method used in this thesis is a judicial-sociological or empirical approach method, known also as socio-legal research. Verification of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building Determination on Trade by Office for Management of Finance and Regional Revenue of Pariaman is based on market value that should be based on transaction value as in line with Regional Regulation on Verification of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building of Pariaman and it also does not fulfill the legal requirement of agreement and the principle of contracting freedom. Verification of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building on Inheritance done by Office for Management of Finance and Regional Revenue in Pariaman is based on market value which is in accordance with the Regional Regulation of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building of Pariaman, its processes is similar to Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building on Trade which are field survey and by seeing the conveyance of rights previously. The legal consequence of verification of Acquisition Duty of Right on Land and Building determination by Office for Management of Finance and Regional Revenue towards Land Deed Official specifically trade contract which is null and void because it violates the principle of contracting freedom and the legal requirement of contract.

The Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia 1945 has guaranteed the right to get a job for every citizen. As an elaboration of Article 28D paragraph (2) of the Constitution, the State issues Law Number 13 of 2003 concerning Manpower which regulates all matters concerning employment relations and rights and obligations between workers / laborers and employers / companies. The Manpower Law regulates PKWT in chapter IX concerning Employment Relations starting from Article 56 paragraph (2) to Article 59. Currently the contract system or PKWT is widely applied by companies / employers in carrying out work relationships. While the type of work done by workers with PKWT is not in accordance with what is mandated by the Manpower Act. This is a denial of Article 59 of the Manpower Act even carried out by SOEs, one of which is Bank Mandiri, which employs workers with PKWT to do work that should be done with PKWTT.