关于《刑法典》第 378 条在土地案件中的存在的刑法改革

Fransiska Khatrine
{"title":"关于《刑法典》第 378 条在土地案件中的存在的刑法改革","authors":"Fransiska Khatrine","doi":"10.59141/jiss.v5i04.1082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is the criminalization of handling land disputes in Indonesia, such as in the case of Decision No. 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN. JKT.SE, namely Ir. Burhanuddin, who owns land with justifiable rights in the form of a Certificate of Ownership as a defendant and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 (three years), shows the need for criminal law reform against the existence of article 378 of the Criminal Code. With the normative juridical research method of the statutory approach, the author finds that the Criminal Act of Fraud 378 of the Criminal Code in the perspective of the Indonesian Criminal Law is connected with land regulations, explaining that Fraud, according to article 378 of the Criminal Code anyone who uses fraud or a series of lies to make someone give something, blame him, or cancel a debt but according to the legal principle lexes specialist systematic derogate lex generalis. While juridically, both the Civil Code and the Basic Agrarian Law do not specifically regulate if there is an error fraud in the sale and purchase of land rights, the sanction given by law is to cancel the sale and purchase deed with a claim for compensation because fraud in the deed of sale and purchase of land rights is not a criminal/criminal act that should be threatened with criminal sanctions but becomes Depenalization. The legal considerations in Decision No. 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN. JKT. SEL, reviewed in the renewal of the Indonesian Criminal Law, that the elements of fraud in the Criminal Code, namely objective and subjective elements of a person, can only be considered to have committed a criminal act of fraud as mentioned in Article 378 of the Criminal Code if all aspects are met. In this case, the perpetrator can only be sentenced according to his actions. Article 378 of the Criminal Code stipulates that someone who commits fraud must deceive the victim in a certain way, but in this case, the Civil Code and the Basic Agrarian Law does not explicitly regulate if there is an error.","PeriodicalId":500768,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains","volume":"179 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Criminal Law Reform of The Existence of Article 378 of The Criminal Code in Land Cases\",\"authors\":\"Fransiska Khatrine\",\"doi\":\"10.59141/jiss.v5i04.1082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is the criminalization of handling land disputes in Indonesia, such as in the case of Decision No. 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN. JKT.SE, namely Ir. Burhanuddin, who owns land with justifiable rights in the form of a Certificate of Ownership as a defendant and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 (three years), shows the need for criminal law reform against the existence of article 378 of the Criminal Code. With the normative juridical research method of the statutory approach, the author finds that the Criminal Act of Fraud 378 of the Criminal Code in the perspective of the Indonesian Criminal Law is connected with land regulations, explaining that Fraud, according to article 378 of the Criminal Code anyone who uses fraud or a series of lies to make someone give something, blame him, or cancel a debt but according to the legal principle lexes specialist systematic derogate lex generalis. While juridically, both the Civil Code and the Basic Agrarian Law do not specifically regulate if there is an error fraud in the sale and purchase of land rights, the sanction given by law is to cancel the sale and purchase deed with a claim for compensation because fraud in the deed of sale and purchase of land rights is not a criminal/criminal act that should be threatened with criminal sanctions but becomes Depenalization. The legal considerations in Decision No. 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN. JKT. SEL, reviewed in the renewal of the Indonesian Criminal Law, that the elements of fraud in the Criminal Code, namely objective and subjective elements of a person, can only be considered to have committed a criminal act of fraud as mentioned in Article 378 of the Criminal Code if all aspects are met. In this case, the perpetrator can only be sentenced according to his actions. Article 378 of the Criminal Code stipulates that someone who commits fraud must deceive the victim in a certain way, but in this case, the Civil Code and the Basic Agrarian Law does not explicitly regulate if there is an error.\",\"PeriodicalId\":500768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains\",\"volume\":\"179 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59141/jiss.v5i04.1082\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59141/jiss.v5i04.1082","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

在印度尼西亚,处理土地纠纷被定为刑事犯罪,如第 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN.JKT.SE,即 Ir.布尔汉努丁(Burhanuddin)作为被告,以所有权证书的形式拥有土地的正当权利,并被判处 3 年(3 年)监禁,这表明有必要针对《刑法典》第 378 条的存在进行刑法改革。通过成文法的规范法学研究方法,作者发现《刑法典》第 378 条诈骗罪在印尼刑法的视角下与土地法规相关联,并解释说,根据《刑法典》第 378 条,诈骗罪是指任何人使用欺诈或一系列谎言使他人给予某物、指责他人或取消债务的行为,但根据法律原则 lexes specialist systematic derogate lex generalis。虽然在法律上,《民法典》和《基本土地法》都没有对土地权买卖中的欺诈行为做出具体规 定,但法律规定的制裁措施是取消买卖契约并要求赔偿,因为土地权买卖契约中的欺诈行为不 是刑事犯罪行为,不应受到刑事制裁的威胁,而应被取消资格。第 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN.JKT.第 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN.JKT.SEL 号决定中的法律考虑,在更新印度尼西亚《刑法》时审查了《刑法典》中的欺诈要件,即一个人的客观要件和主观要件,只有在所有方面都符合的情况下,才能被认为实施了《刑法典》第 378 条中提到的欺诈犯罪行为。在这种情况下,只能根据行为人的行为对其量刑。刑法》第 378 条规定,实施欺诈的人必须以某种方式欺骗受害人,但在这种情况下,《民法》和《基本土地法》没有明确规定是否存在错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Criminal Law Reform of The Existence of Article 378 of The Criminal Code in Land Cases
There is the criminalization of handling land disputes in Indonesia, such as in the case of Decision No. 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN. JKT.SE, namely Ir. Burhanuddin, who owns land with justifiable rights in the form of a Certificate of Ownership as a defendant and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 (three years), shows the need for criminal law reform against the existence of article 378 of the Criminal Code. With the normative juridical research method of the statutory approach, the author finds that the Criminal Act of Fraud 378 of the Criminal Code in the perspective of the Indonesian Criminal Law is connected with land regulations, explaining that Fraud, according to article 378 of the Criminal Code anyone who uses fraud or a series of lies to make someone give something, blame him, or cancel a debt but according to the legal principle lexes specialist systematic derogate lex generalis. While juridically, both the Civil Code and the Basic Agrarian Law do not specifically regulate if there is an error fraud in the sale and purchase of land rights, the sanction given by law is to cancel the sale and purchase deed with a claim for compensation because fraud in the deed of sale and purchase of land rights is not a criminal/criminal act that should be threatened with criminal sanctions but becomes Depenalization. The legal considerations in Decision No. 1154/Pid.B/2021/PN. JKT. SEL, reviewed in the renewal of the Indonesian Criminal Law, that the elements of fraud in the Criminal Code, namely objective and subjective elements of a person, can only be considered to have committed a criminal act of fraud as mentioned in Article 378 of the Criminal Code if all aspects are met. In this case, the perpetrator can only be sentenced according to his actions. Article 378 of the Criminal Code stipulates that someone who commits fraud must deceive the victim in a certain way, but in this case, the Civil Code and the Basic Agrarian Law does not explicitly regulate if there is an error.
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