亚齐省对儿童性虐待施暴者的法律应用二宗教

Amarina habibi
{"title":"亚齐省对儿童性虐待施暴者的法律应用二宗教","authors":"Amarina habibi","doi":"10.15642/ad.2019.9.1.142-167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Act Number 35, 2014 on Child Protection (UUPA) and Qanun (provincial law) Aceh Number 6, 2014 regarding  Qanun Jinayat has given rise to legal dualism. Both laws and regulations govern the same case in the jurisdiction of Aceh, so that it can cause problems in its enforcement. This research applies primary, secondary and tertiary legal sources. This research uses the statue approach. Library research data are then analyzed from secondary and tertiary legal sourcesby using deductive method.The research shows that the enforcement of absolute power at the judicial institutions relating the trial of the sexual offence towards children cases in Aceh, the Public Court, which is granted its power under the UUPA,is privilege compared to Syar’iyah Court, which is having its power from Qanun Jinayat. The reasons for this are as following: a) the punisment in the UUPA is more serious and cumulative, while in Qanun Jinayat is more lenient and alternative; b) UUPA regulates specific things regarding child cases, while Qanun Jinayat is general; c) the enforcement of UUPA together with its changes is still facing hurdles, and there is also the enactment of Qanun Jinayat; d) there are problems in regards with lack of facilities of the detentions and budget during the process of the cases and there is an absent of the cooperation between correctional center for the convicted under the Qanun Jinayat; e) judges in the Public Court mostly already have certificates in dealing with child case compared to   Syar’iyah Court. This research found that the later court judges have not had any certificate yet. The enforcement of punishment towards the perpetrators in Aceh mostly tried under the UUPA compared to using Qanun Jinayat as it provides more justice for victims.","PeriodicalId":441184,"journal":{"name":"Al-Daulah: Jurnal Hukum dan Perundangan Islam","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dualisme Penerapan Hukum Bagi Pelaku Kekerasan Seksual Terhadap Anak di Provinsi Aceh\",\"authors\":\"Amarina habibi\",\"doi\":\"10.15642/ad.2019.9.1.142-167\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Act Number 35, 2014 on Child Protection (UUPA) and Qanun (provincial law) Aceh Number 6, 2014 regarding  Qanun Jinayat has given rise to legal dualism. Both laws and regulations govern the same case in the jurisdiction of Aceh, so that it can cause problems in its enforcement. This research applies primary, secondary and tertiary legal sources. This research uses the statue approach. Library research data are then analyzed from secondary and tertiary legal sourcesby using deductive method.The research shows that the enforcement of absolute power at the judicial institutions relating the trial of the sexual offence towards children cases in Aceh, the Public Court, which is granted its power under the UUPA,is privilege compared to Syar’iyah Court, which is having its power from Qanun Jinayat. The reasons for this are as following: a) the punisment in the UUPA is more serious and cumulative, while in Qanun Jinayat is more lenient and alternative; b) UUPA regulates specific things regarding child cases, while Qanun Jinayat is general; c) the enforcement of UUPA together with its changes is still facing hurdles, and there is also the enactment of Qanun Jinayat; d) there are problems in regards with lack of facilities of the detentions and budget during the process of the cases and there is an absent of the cooperation between correctional center for the convicted under the Qanun Jinayat; e) judges in the Public Court mostly already have certificates in dealing with child case compared to   Syar’iyah Court. This research found that the later court judges have not had any certificate yet. The enforcement of punishment towards the perpetrators in Aceh mostly tried under the UUPA compared to using Qanun Jinayat as it provides more justice for victims.\",\"PeriodicalId\":441184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Al-Daulah: Jurnal Hukum dan Perundangan Islam\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Al-Daulah: Jurnal Hukum dan Perundangan Islam\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15642/ad.2019.9.1.142-167\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Daulah: Jurnal Hukum dan Perundangan Islam","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15642/ad.2019.9.1.142-167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2014年第35号儿童保护法(UUPA)和2014年第6号关于Qanun Jinayat的亚齐省法(Qanun)引发了法律上的二元论。在亚齐省管辖范围内,法律和条例都管辖同一案件,因此在执行时可能会出现问题。本研究应用了一级、二级和三级法律资料。本研究采用雕像法。然后用演绎法从二级和三级法律资料中分析图书馆研究数据。研究表明,在亚齐审判针对儿童的性犯罪案件的司法机构中,公共法院的绝对权力的执行,是根据UUPA授予的权力,与Syar 'iyah法院相比,是一种特权,Syar 'iyah法院从Qanun Jinayat获得权力。其原因如下:a) UUPA的惩罚更为严重和累加,而Qanun Jinayat的惩罚则更为宽松和可替代;b) UUPA规定儿童案件的具体事项,而Qanun Jinayat则是一般性的;c) UUPA的执行及其变化仍然面临障碍,并且还存在Qanun Jinayat;(d)在案件审理过程中,存在拘留设施和预算不足的问题,而且根据《人权法》被定罪者的惩教中心之间缺乏合作;e)与伊斯兰法院相比,公共法院的法官大多已经拥有处理儿童案件的证书。研究发现,后来的法院法官还没有任何证书。与使用Qanun Jinayat相比,亚齐对肇事者的惩罚大多是在UUPA下进行的,因为它为受害者提供了更多的正义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dualisme Penerapan Hukum Bagi Pelaku Kekerasan Seksual Terhadap Anak di Provinsi Aceh
Act Number 35, 2014 on Child Protection (UUPA) and Qanun (provincial law) Aceh Number 6, 2014 regarding  Qanun Jinayat has given rise to legal dualism. Both laws and regulations govern the same case in the jurisdiction of Aceh, so that it can cause problems in its enforcement. This research applies primary, secondary and tertiary legal sources. This research uses the statue approach. Library research data are then analyzed from secondary and tertiary legal sourcesby using deductive method.The research shows that the enforcement of absolute power at the judicial institutions relating the trial of the sexual offence towards children cases in Aceh, the Public Court, which is granted its power under the UUPA,is privilege compared to Syar’iyah Court, which is having its power from Qanun Jinayat. The reasons for this are as following: a) the punisment in the UUPA is more serious and cumulative, while in Qanun Jinayat is more lenient and alternative; b) UUPA regulates specific things regarding child cases, while Qanun Jinayat is general; c) the enforcement of UUPA together with its changes is still facing hurdles, and there is also the enactment of Qanun Jinayat; d) there are problems in regards with lack of facilities of the detentions and budget during the process of the cases and there is an absent of the cooperation between correctional center for the convicted under the Qanun Jinayat; e) judges in the Public Court mostly already have certificates in dealing with child case compared to   Syar’iyah Court. This research found that the later court judges have not had any certificate yet. The enforcement of punishment towards the perpetrators in Aceh mostly tried under the UUPA compared to using Qanun Jinayat as it provides more justice for victims.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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