Suchergebnisse

Base on the data from Indonesian Narcotic National Body and Indonesian National Police the number of confiscate Narcotic and Narcotics criminal offender continue to increase every years. To realize national purpose of Indoensian to protection all Indoensian people, exspecialy from dangerous of Narcotic, Indoensian Government and Representaion House of Indonesian has issued some law of Narcotics Dealer in Indonesian, the last law Narcotics Dealer in Indonesia that has issued is Narcotics Dealer Act Number 35 year 2009. One of the new consept in this Narcotics Dealer Act Number 35 year 2009 is specific minimal criminal sanctions that regulated in article 111 to article 126. But the fact, in Indonesian's court practice, Judge's decision were did not always obeying the limit of specific minimal criminal sanctions. One of the Court Judgement that were did not obeying the limit of specific minimal criminal sanctions in Narcotics criminal case as defendant of Agusrini in Judge's decision number 40 / Pid.Sus / 2014 / PN.SLK at July 17 2014 in District Cour Of Solok, meanwhile in District Cour Of Solok another Narcotic criminal case Judge's decesion in were obeying the limit of specific minimal criminal sanctions. This situation make uncertainty of the law. Base on the legal problems, by using normative approach in case approach, this research tries to analyze the proof of Narcotics criminal case is defendant of Agusrini in District Cour Of Solok, and the the judge's cosideration imprisonment under specific minimal criminal sanctions of article 111 section 1 Act Number 35 year 2009 by applied criminal law theory and other related law theory. The conclusions as the result of this research are: The proof of Narcotics criminal case is defendant of Agusrini in District Cour Of Solok hase fulfilled threshold proof in Indonesian procedure of criminal (Negatief Wettelijk); and the judge's cosideration in Court Judment on Narcotics criminal case as defendant of Agusrini in District Cour Of Solok imprisonment under specific ...

The implementation of Article 303 subsection (1) of Criminal Code empirically has been conducted in the decision Number 24/PID.B/2012/PN.PP. The defendant named Giman called as Dolok, aged 60 years old, an enterpreneur, adressed in Pemuda Street Number 33 RT 01 Subdistrict of Koto Panjang, Padang Panjang City. There are some differences between criminal regulations in Article 303 subsection (1) of Criminal Code which is the imprisonment for 10 years with verdict of imprisonment for 3 months and 15 days. The objective of this research is to know how the law enforcement in impositioning imprisonment towards gambling crime offender in the Decision Number: 24/PID.B/ 2012/PN.PP? by using normative judicial approach. The present research is descriptive. The legal material analysis is done by using qualitative analysis method. The conclusion of this research: 1) The law enforcement in the Decision Number: 24/PID.B/ 2012/PN.PP has been achieved by implementing the regulation of Article 303 subsection (1) of Criminal Code. The article regulation is implemented in the gambling crime offender. The law enforcement towards the gambling crime offender is done by judge with Verdict Number: 24/PID.B/ 2012/PN.PP, the judge has imprisoned the doer by the way which has been set in the constitution. The law enforcement with law enforcement phases is the effort to guarantee that decision Number: 24/PID.B/ 2012/PN.PP has legal certainty.

The condition among the Indonesians nowadays indicated that there are many legal cases, especially in the medical disputes between doctors and hospitals on the one side towards their patients on the other side. The medical disputes are basically emerged because there is an inequality between patients expectation with reality that patients get. The first problem of this research is how are the legal relations of doctors and hospitals on the one side towards their patients on the other side under the Indonesian civil law system, and the second problem of this research is what are the criteria to determined doctors and hospitals could be liable under the civil law system towards their patients damaged in the medical disputes. The first objective of this research is to study and analyze how are the legal relations of doctors and hospitals on the one side towards their patients on the other side under the Indonesian civil law system, and the second objective of this research is to study and analyze what are the criteria to determined doctors and hospitals could be liable under the civil law system towards patients damaged in the medical disputes. The method used in approaching the problem of this research is normative juridical. The type of this research is descriptive analytics. The source of this research is from secondary data with using primary legal substance, secondary legal substance, and tertiary legal substance. Based on the result of the research, it can be concluded that are, first, the legal relations between doctors towards their patients in medical services emerged because there are therapeutic contractual and the regulations which is regulated in Civil Law Code Article Number 1233, while the legal relations between hospitals towards their patients included in common contractual which is regulated in Civil Law Code Article Number 1234, and also could emerged according to Civil Law Code Article Number 1367 (3). Second, the criteria for doctors and hospitals can be declared responsible for the loss of patients, are because of negligence by doing medical actions contrary to the standards operational procedures (SOP) and the service standards, and also because of negligence based on legislation.