KEBIJAKAN PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN TERHADAP SPESIALISASI HAKIM DALAM MENGADILI PERKARA

Ferry Asril

Sari


The specialization of the judge has no influence on the decision that was handed down because as long as no legal action is taken, then the decision is considered correct and there is no doubt about the decision. This paper conducts a study of the policy of the legislation on the specialization of judges in adjudicating cases and the reasons for the need for specialization of judges in adjudicating a case. Thus, it can be formulated precisely the specificity of the judge in adjudicating a case. This research is seen from the type is a normative legal research. Meanwhile, judging from its nature, this research is descriptive, namely research that provides a clear and detailed description of the problems studied. Legislative policies regarding the specialization of judges in adjudicating cases have been determined based on the absolute competence of a judicial body, namely regarding the authority of which judicial bodies to examine, hear, and decide on a case, namely general courts, religious courts, military courts, and administrative courts. state effort. Specialization of judges in adjudicating cases is very necessary because it aims to develop the expertise and expertise of judges in adjudicating cases. In addition, in order to increase productivity in examinations which will indirectly affect the disparity of decisions.

Teks Lengkap:

PDF

Referensi


DetikNews. (2011). Usai Lebaran, MA Terapkan Sistem Kamar Perkara. Retrieved from https://news.detik.com/berita/d-1706972/usai-lebaran-ma-terapkan-sistem-kamar-perkara

Handoko, D. (2015). Kekuasaan Kehakiman di Indonesia. Pekanbaru: Hawa dan AHWA.

Harahap, Z. (2002). Hukum Acara Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

Ismail MZ, H. (2022). Keterlibatan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat dalam Pengisian Jabatan Hakim Agung dan Hakim Konstitusi Ditinjau dari Perspektif Ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Jurnal Ganec Swara, 16(1).

Mansur, D. M. A., & Gultom, E. (2005). Cyber Law: Aspek Hukum Teknologi Informasi. Bandung: Refika Aditama.

Marzuqoh, A. A. (2020). Prinsip Akuntabilitas Dalam Pemilihan Hakim Konstitusi. Jurist-Diction, 3(4), 1373. https://doi.org/10.20473/jd.v3i4.20211

Mertokusumo, S., & Pitlo, A. (1993). Bab-bab tentang Penemuan Hukum. Yogyakarta: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Novanilia, A., & Syarief, E. (2021). Quo Vadis Penyelesaian Perkara Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) pada Lembaga Keuangan Syariah. Jornal of Law and Policy Transformation, 6(2), 55–71.

Nursobah, A. (2011). Sejarah Sistem Kamar pada Mahkamah Agung. Retrieved from https://kepaniteraan.mahkamahagung.go.id/sistem-kamar/sejarah-sistem-kamar

Rasaid, M. N. (1996). Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Saputra, M. N. (1988). Hukum Administrasi Negara. Jakarta: Rajawali.

Soepomo. (2002). Hukum Acara Perdata Pengadilan Negeri. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.

Subekti, R. (1999). Hukum Pembuktian. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.

Supriadi. (2006). Etika & Tanggung Jawab Profesi Hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Sutatiek, S. (2012). Peningkatan Profesionalisme Hakim Agung melalui Pemberlakuan Sistem Kamar dalam Pembuatan Putusan Perkara. Arena Hukum, 5(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2012.00501.8

Wantu, F. M., Nggilu, N. M., Imran, S., Arief, S. A., & Gobel, R. T. S. (2021). Proses Seleksi Hakim Konstitusi: Problematika dan Model Ke Depan. Jurnal Konstitusi, 18(2).

Yuwono, I. D. (2011). Panduan Memilih dan Menggunakan Jasa Advokat. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Yustisia.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.33559/eoj.v5i1.1288

Refbacks

  • Saat ini tidak ada refbacks.


Jumlah Kunjungan

Negara Pengunjung

Flag Counter

Lisensi Creative Commons
Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi 4.0 Internasional.