MIMBAR YUSTITIA : Jurnal Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia

Responsibility of Notaries in Making Sale and Purchase Agreement Where the Object Is in Dispute

Rita Bayu Astuti — 2025-12-19

The purpose of this research is to analyze and find out the Notary's responsibility in making the sale and purchase binding agreement that he made. The approach method in this research is normative juridical. The data used are primary and secondary data obtained through interviews and literature study, data analysis was carried out by analytical descriptive. The results of the research concluded: The Notary's responsibility in making the sale and purchase binding agreement that he made is if the sale and purchase agreement on land signed and made by a Notary made an error, it is not in accordance with the procedure for making it, then the Notary has legal responsibility to whom and to whom. who the deed of sale and purchase agreement is made, and if the Notary is proven to have made a mistake, whether intentional or unintentional, then the legal consequences that arise can be subject to sanctions according to the level of error or error in the binding deed of sale and purchase made by a Notary may be subject to sanctions including administrative sanctions. The solution to making a deed of sale and purchase binding agreement (PPJB) in the event of a dispute is through deliberation or through the courts. The aggrieved party can sue the party who caused the loss in court or by canceling the agreement that has been made by the parties. Dispute resolution using non-litigation or Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is actually a family dispute resolution model compared to dispute resolution through judicial institutions which tend to be confrontational, taking into account wins and losses and ignores social elements in society. While the settlement through the judiciary is carried out if the deliberation efforts are not reached, then the settlement must be through the courts.

Professional Code of Ethics for Managing Interreligious Cohesion in the Digital Era

Guruh David Agus — 2025-12-25

A professional code of ethics is a written guideline that affirms values, norms, and professional conduct. It clarifies professional ethics, prevents bias, safeguards integrity, and builds public trust. Binding in nature, any violation is subject to sanctions and must be upheld by all members of the profession. Individuals in any vocational field, especially those engaged with religious affairs, are equally obliged to honor their professional code of ethics. On World Human Rights Day 2024, Imparsial observed that religious actors in Indonesia failed to strengthen social cohesion, while state apparatuses were permissive toward groups undermining religious freedom. This research aims to answer: What if the professional code of ethics were employed as a framework of managing interreligious social cohesion in Indonesia’s digital era? This qualitative and explanatory study positions TAP MPR No. 6/2001 on the Ethics of Living as a Nation as its material object, and Jimly Asshiddiqie’s concept of the National Ethics Court (MEN) as its formal object. In Indonesia’s digital era information unavoidably finds pathways into the public sphere regardless of boundaries or constraints. As corporeal and digital actions increasingly converge the digital realm paradoxically demands corporeal solutions, particularly in contexts where ethical integrity is essential. TAP MPR No. 6/2001 encompasses socio-cultural ethics, political governance ethics, and fair legal enforcement ethics as a constitutional foundation for interreligious cohesion. Asshiddiqie envisions MEN as the culmination of Indonesia’s ethical judicial process, integrating institutional ethical systems. Guided by MEN’s framework, national ethics can reinforce the role of professional codes, offering more relevant and effective sanctions to guide religious-sector actors in upholding their ethical obligations and preserving interreligious social cohesion.

Legal Consequences Of Self-Promotion By Notaries Through Social Media

Yustisya Zaharon — 2025-12-31

Social media is one example of the many uses of technology due to the current of globalization. One profession that uses social media is the profession of notary to promote themselves. The form of self-promotion by Notaries through social media is a violation of Article 4 paragraph (3) of the Notary Code of Ethics, that Notaries are prohibited from publishing or promoting themselves, either alone or together by including their name and position, using print and/or electronic media, in the form of advertisements, congratulations, thanks, marketing activities, sponsorship activities, whether in the social, religious, or sports fields. The purpose of this study is to determine the results of legal self-promotion by notaries through social media. The research method used is normative juridical with a regulatory-statute approach and a conseptual approach. The results of the study revealed that the legal consequences for notaries who promote themselves through social media are only regulated in Article 6 paragraph (1) and (2) of the Notary Code of Ethics, the legal consequences of paragraph (1) include: Reprimand, Warning, Schorsing (temporary dismissal) from the Association, Onzetting (dismissal) from the Association, and Dishonorable Dismissal from the Association. Then, paragraph (2) states that sanctions imposed on members who violate the Code of Ethics are adjusted according to the quantity and quality of the violations committed. In conclusion, self-promotion by Notaries through social media is only regulated in Article 4 paragraph (3) of the Notary Code of Ethics. There is still ambiguity in Article 17 paragraph (1) letter i of the Notary Law, which only stipulates that Notaries are prohibited from engaging in other work that conflicts with religious norms, morality, or propriety that could affect the honor and dignity of the Notary position. However, it does not further regulate what work falls within the qualifications to affect the honor and dignity of the Notary position. This certainly creates legal uncertainty for Notaries.

Implementation of the Duties of the Village Consultative Body in the Interim Village Head Election in Bondowoso

Ali Zaenal Abidin — 2026-01-20

This study examines the implementation of Article 37 letter h of the Bondowoso Regency Regional Regulation Number 2 of 2020 concerning the duties of the Village Consultative Body (BPD) in holding special village deliberations for the Election of the Interim Village Head (PAW). The background of this research departs from the gap between the normative framework that requires inclusive, democratic, and representative participation and the empirical reality that often shows the dominance of local elites and the lack of community involvement at large. The purpose of this study is to analyze the extent to which BPD's duties in PAW are carried out effectively in accordance with regulatory provisions, as well as to identify obstacles faced in their implementation. This study uses a normative juridical method combined with historical and conceptual approaches. The normative approach is carried out through the study of relevant laws and regulations, a historical approach tracing the development of PAW governance, and a conceptual approach examining academic views and participatory democratic theory. The findings of a case study in Pelalangan Village, Cermee District, show that although procedurally the implementation of PAW has been in accordance with applicable regulations, it still substantially does not meet the principle of fair representation. Village deliberative forums are dominated by certain community leaders, while women's groups, youth, marginalized communities, and the general public are less involved. The causative factors include low public legal literacy, the absence of clear technical guidelines regarding the composition of representation, and the lack of public information disclosure. This study concludes that the implementation of PAW requires regulatory reform, the preparation of technical guidelines for inclusive participation, and sustainable community empowerment to ensure democratic legitimacy. Strengthening structural and cultural aspects is the key to realizing a fair, participatory, and reflective PAW that reflects the aspirations of the entire community.

Rural and Urban Land and Building Tax Fines and Taxpayer Compliance: A Constitutional Law Review and Its Relevance to Local Revenue

Didit Darmawan — 2025-12-30

Rural and Urban Land and Building Tax (PBB-P2) is a major source of Local Own-Source Revenue (Pendapatan Asli Daerah, PAD) in Indonesia and is administered by local governments within the country’s delegative decentralization framework. While local fiscal autonomy enables regions to adjust certain parameters of PBB-P2 administration through local regulations, the use of sanctions, particularly fines for late payment or non-compliance,raises a constitutional question regarding the limits of regional taxing authority and the protection of taxpayers’ rights. This study addresses the gap between fiscal-administrative discussions of PBB-P2 enforcement and a constitutional law assessment of whether local fine regimes remain legitimate under rule-of-law standards. This research employs a normative-juridical (doctrinal) approach by analyzing applicable positive law governing local taxation, especially Law No. 28 of 2009 on Regional Taxes and Regional Levies alongside relevant administrative practices oncerning PBB-P2 fines and arrears. The analysis demonstrates that local governments are constitutionally permitted to impose PBB-P2 fines as part of fiscal decentralization and regional autonomy; however, such authority is not absolute. Because fines directly impose coercive burdens in the state–citizen relationship, their design and enforcement must comply with the principles of legality and legal certainty, proportionality, and non-discrimination. These requirements demand clear and accessible standards for liability, predictable calculation and collection procedures, reasonable calibration between the fine and the taxpayer’s conduct (including realistic ability to comply), and equal treatment for similarly situated taxpayers, supported by fair procedures and effective remedies. The study concludes that strengthening PBB-P2 enforcement should not rely solely on deterrence logic or revenue targets. Evidence-based improvements are needed to align sanction design with constitutional safeguards, thereby enhancing compliance while sustaining public trust and the legitimacy of local taxation.