Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Journal SINTA 1

PERSEPSI KETUA PENGADILAN NEGERI DAN KETUA PENGADILAN AGAMA TENTANG PENINJAUAN KEMBALI (PK) PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO. 34/PUU-XI/2013 DALAM HUKUM ACARA PERDATA

Syariah Jurnal Hukum dan Pemikiran · Vol. 15 No. 1 (2016)

DOI
10.18592/syariah.v15i1.543
ISSN
2549-001X, 1412-6303
Published
2016-02-03
Publisher
Universitas Islam Negeri Antasari Banjarmasin
Language
eng

Abstract

Since test material to the provisions of Pasal 268 ayat (3) Undang-Undang No. 8 Tahun 1981on Criminal Proceedings in Mahkamah Konstitusi, Mahkahmah decided in its decision number 34 /PUU-XI / 2013, which states that the provisions was inconsistent with the Undang-Undang Dasar1945, so it does not have binding legal force. Therefore, Peninjauan Kembali (PK) in criminal cases maybe done more than once with the new circumstances or conditions found substantial novum new foundduring previous PK undiscovered. If problems associated PK novum criminal case is considered sub-stantial, and neither should Novum issues related PK in civil cases, as may be after the filing of the PKand disconnected, no new circumstances or substantial novum recently discovered that during theprevious PK undiscovered or if there is a decision of a judges mistake or a real mistake was discoveredafter PK decided. PK is an extraordinary remedy that aims to find justice and truth material. Justice cannot be limited by time or formal provision that limits that PK is only one time. Justice is a very basichuman needs, the more basic human needs of the rule of law. But in civil cases, the results of this studyindicate that the filing PK limited only once.

Collaboration network of the authors

3 authors · 3 co-authorship links

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Universitas Islam Negeri Antasari Banjarmasin
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Arie SulistyokoUniversitas Islam Negeri Antasari Banjarmasin1
Ahmadi HasanUniversitas Islam Negeri Antasari Banjarmasin1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) http://jurnal.uin-antasari.ac.id/index.php/syariah/oai, first harvested 10 Nov 2026, last seen 10 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">PERSEPSI KETUA PENGADILAN NEGERI DAN KETUA PENGADILAN AGAMA TENTANG PENINJAUAN KEMBALI (PK) PASCA PUTUSAN MK NO. 34/PUU-XI/2013 DALAM HUKUM ACARA PERDATA</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Basri, Bahran</dc:creator>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">Since test material to the provisions of Pasal 268 ayat (3) Undang-Undang No. 8 Tahun 1981on Criminal Proceedings in Mahkamah Konstitusi, Mahkahmah decided in its decision number 34 /PUU-XI / 2013, which states that the provisions was inconsistent with the Undang-Undang Dasar1945, so it does not have binding legal force. Therefore, Peninjauan Kembali (PK) in criminal cases maybe done more than once with the new circumstances or conditions found substantial novum new foundduring previous PK undiscovered. If problems associated PK novum criminal case is considered sub-stantial, and neither should Novum issues related PK in civil cases, as may be after the filing of the PKand disconnected, no new circumstances or substantial novum recently discovered that during theprevious PK undiscovered or if there is a decision of a judges mistake or a real mistake was discoveredafter PK decided. PK is an extraordinary remedy that aims to find justice and truth material. Justice cannot be limited by time or formal provision that limits that PK is only one time. Justice is a very basichuman needs, the more basic human needs of the rule of law. But in civil cases, the results of this studyindicate that the filing PK limited only once.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Universitas Islam Negeri Antasari Banjarmasin</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2016-02-03</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>http://jurnal.uin-antasari.ac.id/index.php/syariah/article/view/543</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.18592/syariah.v15i1.543</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">Syariah: Jurnal Hukum dan Pemikiran; Vol. 15 No. 1 (2015)</dc:source>
	<dc:source xml:lang="id-ID">Syariah: Jurnal Hukum dan Pemikiran; Vol 15 No 1 (2015)</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2549-001X</dc:source>
	<dc:source>1412-6303</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>http://jurnal.uin-antasari.ac.id/index.php/syariah/article/view/543/pdf_5</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2016 Bahran Basri</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>