Ratio Legis Unsur Tanpa Hak Dalam Perundangan Tentang Penggunaan Senjata Tajam Di Indonesia

F. Anto, Febriana Nur Widyaningsih, S. Suratman, M. Muhibbin
{"title":"Ratio Legis Unsur Tanpa Hak Dalam Perundangan Tentang Penggunaan Senjata Tajam Di Indonesia","authors":"F. Anto, Febriana Nur Widyaningsih, S. Suratman, M. Muhibbin","doi":"10.47200/jnajpm.v7i2.1328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Law appears in accordance with the political and social configuration of a certain period. This fact indicates that the law continues to require renewal. One of the proofs that the law cannot reach people's lives which continues to develop is the emergence of Emergency Law no. 12 of 1951. The emergency law emerged as a renewal of the Republic of Indonesia Law No. 8 of 1948, and changed the Ordonnantie Tijdelijke Bijzondere Strafbepalingen (sbtl. 1948 No. 17). At certain times the emergency law was the right solution, but now the law that has not been updated can cause problems. One of the problems that arise is the ambiguity of the \"without rights\" element in the use of sharp weapons. The law does not specify which party has the right or the right to not use sharp weapons. In order for the law to continue to be used, a ratio legis is needed. This study aims to examine (1) the ratio of the elements of \"without rights\" in Article 2 of Law no. 12 of 1951, and (2) the configuration of the concept of Article 2 of Law no. 12 Year 1951 which is ideal in the future. This research is juridical-normative research with a statutory approach. The technique of analyzing legal materials is done by qualitative descriptive. The results of this study include, (1) the phrase \"without rights\" needs to be specified so as not to cause multiple interpretations, and (2) Law no. 12 of 1951 is no longer relevant to use.","PeriodicalId":126951,"journal":{"name":"Nuansa Akademik: Jurnal Pembangunan Masyarakat","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nuansa Akademik: Jurnal Pembangunan Masyarakat","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47200/jnajpm.v7i2.1328","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Law appears in accordance with the political and social configuration of a certain period. This fact indicates that the law continues to require renewal. One of the proofs that the law cannot reach people's lives which continues to develop is the emergence of Emergency Law no. 12 of 1951. The emergency law emerged as a renewal of the Republic of Indonesia Law No. 8 of 1948, and changed the Ordonnantie Tijdelijke Bijzondere Strafbepalingen (sbtl. 1948 No. 17). At certain times the emergency law was the right solution, but now the law that has not been updated can cause problems. One of the problems that arise is the ambiguity of the "without rights" element in the use of sharp weapons. The law does not specify which party has the right or the right to not use sharp weapons. In order for the law to continue to be used, a ratio legis is needed. This study aims to examine (1) the ratio of the elements of "without rights" in Article 2 of Law no. 12 of 1951, and (2) the configuration of the concept of Article 2 of Law no. 12 Year 1951 which is ideal in the future. This research is juridical-normative research with a statutory approach. The technique of analyzing legal materials is done by qualitative descriptive. The results of this study include, (1) the phrase "without rights" needs to be specified so as not to cause multiple interpretations, and (2) Law no. 12 of 1951 is no longer relevant to use.
在有关印尼使用利器武器的法律上,不合法的元素煽动
法律是根据一定时期的政治和社会形态而产生的。这一事实表明,法律继续需要更新。《紧急状态法》的出现是法律无法深入到不断发展的人民生活的证据之一。1951年12号。《紧急状态法》是对印度尼西亚共和国1948年第8号法的更新,并改变了《紧急状态法》。1948年第17期)。在某些时候,紧急状态法是正确的解决办法,但现在没有更新的法律可能会造成问题。出现的问题之一是使用尖锐武器时“无权利”因素的模糊性。法律没有明确规定哪一方有权或有权不使用尖锐武器。为了使法律继续适用,需要一个比率立法。本研究旨在考察:(1)《中华人民共和国第2号法》第2条中“无权利”要素的比例。(2) 1951年第12号法第2条概念的构成。1951年是未来最理想的一年。本研究是采用成文法方法的司法规范研究。分析法律资料的方法是定性描述。本文的研究结果包括:(1)需要对“无权利”一词进行明确界定,以免造成多重解释;1951年12号法令已不再适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信