http://journal.uwgm.ac.id/index.php/yuriska/issue/feed Yuriska : Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 2020-06-18T12:45:38+07:00 Dini Pratiwi diniprawitie@gmail.com Open Journal Systems http://journal.uwgm.ac.id/index.php/yuriska/article/view/866 Kajian Hukum Atas Hubungan Antara Nasabah Dan Bank Ditinjau Dari Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 1998 Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 1992 Tentang Perbankan 2020-06-18T12:40:33+07:00 Andriany Widie Astuti candra.hoo@gmail.com Wahyuni Safitri wahyunibun@gmail.com <p align="justify">The relationship between banks and customers is based on the two most related elements, namely law and trust. A bank can only carry out activities and develop its bank, if the community "believes" to place its money, on banking products that exist in the bank. The higher the trust of the community, the higher the public's awareness to save money with the bank and to use other banking services. Public trust is the main key to the development or failure of a bank, in the sense that without the trust of the community, then a bank will not be able to carry out its business activities. For business people, banks are the main complement in carrying out daily activities, controlling the entry and exit of funds and achieving success, and are usually in the form of checking accounts. Based on this, the writer wants to examine more deeply the relationship between customers and banks regarding account information, bank rights and customer rights, and is associated with existing regulatory regulations.</p> 2020-04-02T04:16:42+07:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Authors http://journal.uwgm.ac.id/index.php/yuriska/article/view/813 MARAKNYA KORUPSI DI PEMERINTAHAN DAERAH DALAM ERA DESENTRALISASI 2020-06-18T12:42:09+07:00 Bima Guntara dosen02148@unpam.ac.id <p>Keinginan bagi kita semua bangsa Indonesia untuk memiliki pemerintahan yang terbebas dari praktik korupsi, namun itu semua terasa hanya sebuah angan-angan saja melihat maraknya praktik korupsi yang terjadi di negara ini, hal ini di perparah dengan banyaknya praktik korupsi yang dipertontonkan oleh aparatur pemerintah daerah. Praktik korupsi yang menjamur di daerah menjadikan cita-cita demokrasi yang terbebas dari praktik korupsi di pemerintahan daerah seakan sulit terwujud. Penanganan terkait semakin maraknya praktik korupsi pun telah dilakukan oleh negara mulai dari membuat regulasi hingga membentuk sebuah lembaga yang khusus menangani penyakit yang tak kunjung terobati dan terus menggerogoti sendi-sendi kehidupan di tanah air yang kita cinta ini. Tujuan dilakukannya penelitian ini ialah untuk mengetahui tren korupsi yang terjadi di pemerintahan daerah dalam era desentralisasi. Penulis memilih menggunakan pendekatan studi pustaka dengan teknik analisis deskriptif dalam metode penulisan agar mengetahui lebih jauh mengenai lahirnya desentralisasi dan tren korupsi dalam hubungannya dengan penerapan otonomi daerah serta fenomena menjamurnya praktik korupsi yang terus berlangsung di daerah.</p><p>Kata Kunci: Korupsi; Pemerintahan Daerah; Desentralisasi</p> 2020-04-02T04:16:42+07:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Bima Guntara http://journal.uwgm.ac.id/index.php/yuriska/article/view/865 Peranan UPT Dinas Pasar Dalam Melakukan Pemungutan Retribusi Di Lingkungan Pasar Segiri Kota Samarinda 2020-06-18T12:43:22+07:00 Hasrina Wati hasrinawati25@gmail.com Nainuri Suhadi nainhadi@yahoo.co.id <p align="justify">This study aims to determine the role of the Market Service UPT in collecting retribution in the Segiri Market Area of Samarinda City in Review of Samarinda City Regulation Number 2 of 2016 concerning Amendment to Regional Regulation Number 13 of 2011 concerning Public Service Retribution and Market Service actions against money withdrawal carried out by thug persons to traders who illegal sales outside the Segiri Market area of Samarinda City. This research is an empirical legal research that comes from primary legal material and secondary legal material. The results showed that the role of the Market Service in collecting levy in the Segiri Market Area of Samarinda City (reviewed from the Regional Regulation of Samarinda City Number 2 of 2016 concerning Amendment to Regional Regulation Number 13 of 2011 concerning Public Service Retribution), namely three roles, first giving direction, provide supervision and provide guidance. Whereas the actions of the Market Service UPT against money withdrawals made by individual thug to traders who sell illegal outside the Segiri Market area of Samarinda City are divided into two, the first action of the Segiri Market Service UPT against the thug includes conducting thug raids and controlling the land gangster extortion, then secondly, the action of the Segiri Market Service UPT against illegal traders, which includes the provision of sanctions, enforcement, confiscation of merchandise.<strong><em></em></strong></p> 2020-04-02T04:16:43+07:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Authors http://journal.uwgm.ac.id/index.php/yuriska/article/view/789 EKSEKUSI OBJEK JAMINAN FIDUSIA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 18/PUU-XVII/2019 2020-06-18T12:44:35+07:00 JAMES RIDWAN EFFERIN james.ridwan.efferin-2018@fh.unair.ac.id <p align="center"><strong><em>ABSTRACT</em></strong><strong></strong></p><p><em>On the 6<sup>th</sup> day of January 2020, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia has issued a Decree Number </em><em>18/PUU-XVII/2019 (“the Constitutional Court Decree”), </em><em>which decides that </em><em>regarding the phrase “has an equal enforceable power as the court decisions that have permanent legal force” on Article 15 Paragraph (2) of the </em><em>Law number 42 year 1999 on Fiduciary (“the Law No. 42/1999”),</em><em> is in contradiction with</em><em> the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and shall have no legal binding power if it is not considered to be </em><em>“towards any fiduciary that have no consent on default and the debtor has raised an objection to surrender the fiduciary object voluntarily. Furthermore the</em><em> phrase “default” on Article 15 Paragraph (3) of the Law No. 42/1999 is in contradiction with</em><em> the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and shall have no legal binding power if it is not considered to be “a default shall not be determined solely by the creditor, but should be based on a consent between the creditor and debtor o</em><em>r based on any legal actions which determine the said default.”</em></p><p><em>The Constitutional Court gives a legal interpretation that the executorial power of the Fiduciary Certificate is not considered automatically being applicable, but it shall depend on certain condition(s), i.e.: a consent on default by the creditor and debtor, and /or the willingness of the debtor to voluntarily surrender its fiduciary objects. </em></p><p><em>This Decree will give an impact to the creditor because Fiduciary is supposed to have a character of ease on the execution if the debtor is in default (Elucidation of Article 15 Paragraph (3) Law No. 42/1999), but now if the debtor refused to cooperate, then the creditor should have a decree from the Court first before executing any fiduciary object.</em></p><p><em>The type of this legal research is juridical normative with a legal and conceptual approaches.</em></p><p><em> </em></p><p><em>Keywords:</em> <em>Constitutional Court Decree No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019</em>; <em>Execution; Fiduciary</em></p><p><em> </em></p><p align="center"><strong>ABSTRAK</strong></p><p align="center"><strong> </strong></p><p> Pada tanggal 6 Januari 2020 Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia telah mengeluarkan Putusan Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 (“Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi”) yang menentukan bahwa frasa “kekuatan eksekutorial” dan “sama dengan putusan pengadilan yang berkekuatan hukum tetap” pada Pasal 15 Ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia (“UU No. 42/1999”), bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat sepanjang tidak dimaknai “terhadap jaminan fidusia yang tidak ada kesepakatan tentang cidera janji dan debitur keberatan menyerahkan secara sukarela objek yang menjadi jaminan fidusia. Selain itu frasa “cidera janji” pada Pasal 15 Ayat (3) UU No. 42/1999 juga dinyatakan bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat sepanjang tidak dimaknai bahwa “adanya cidera janji tidak ditentukan secara sepihak oleh kreditur melainkan atas dasar kesepakatan antara kreditur dengan debitur atau atas dasar upaya hukum yang menentukan telah terjadinya cidera janji.”</p><p>Mahkamah Konstitusi telah memberikan penafsiran hukum bahwa kekuatan eksekutorial Sertifikat Jaminan Fidusia tidak serta merta dapat diberlakukan, namun digantungkan pada suatu keadaan tertentu, misalnya: kesepakatan cidera janji oleh kreditur dan debitur, dan/atau kesediaan debitur untuk menyerahkan objek jaminan fidusia dengan sukarela.</p><p>Keputusan ini memberikan dampak kepada kreditur karena seharusnya Jaminan Fidusia mempunyai sifat mudah dalam eksekusi apabila debitur wanprestasi (Penjelasan Pasal 15 Ayat (3) UU No. 42/1999), tetapi saat ini apabila debitur menolak bekerjasama, maka kreditur harus memperoleh putusan pengadilan lebih dahulu sebelum melakukan eksekusi.</p><p>Tipe penelitian hukum ini adalah yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan konseptual.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Kata Kunci: </strong>Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi 18/PUU-XVII/2019; Eksekutorial; Fidusia</p> 2020-04-02T04:16:43+07:00 Copyright (c) 2020 JAMES RIDWAN EFFERIN http://journal.uwgm.ac.id/index.php/yuriska/article/view/824 Perlindungan Hukum Persaingan Usaha Terhadap Indikasi Persekongkolan Tender Jack Up Drilling Rig Services Antara HUSKY-CNOOC MADURA LIMITED Dengan PT COSL INDO (Analisis Putusan KPPU No. 03/KPPU-L/2016) 2020-06-18T12:45:38+07:00 suradiyanto suradiyanto suradiyanto60@gmail.com Dinny Wirawan Pratiwie dinipratiwie@gmail.com <p>Conspiracy use various way for coordinate activities they like through settings production, determination price horizontally, collusive tendering, division area, division consumer as a non-territorial, and division share market, even though similarly we need realize it that effective conspiracy it is not easy for achieved. However there trend the perpetrators business will always attempted maximizing profit his company respectively. Must there is some requirement in occurrence a conspiracy is must existence deal agreement or collusion between perpetrators effort. There is two form collusion in conspiracy, namely: collusion explicit, where the member communicate and coordinate deal they on real/live can declared with some document agreement already they agree, the data regarding the joint audit, management conspiracy, policies-policies writing, sales data and other data. There is also collusion secretly, where the perpetrators business member conspiracy no communicate on blatant, usually meetings too held on secret. And regular use as the media is association industry, so meetings member conspiracy camouflaged with legal meetings such as meeting associations. Form the second collusion this very difficult for detected by enforcer law. However experience from various country prove that at least 30% of conspiracy is involve associations.</p> 2020-04-02T04:16:44+07:00 Copyright (c) 2020 Authors