MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027168468 · doi:10.14710/nts.v13i1.29166

REAKTUALISASI UNDANG-UNDANG JABATAN NOTARIS TERKAIT DIGITALISASI MINUTA AKTA OLEH NOTARIS

2020· article· id· W3027168468 on OpenAlexaff
Lana Imtiyaz, Budi Santoso, Adya Paramita Prabandari

Bibliographic record

VenueNOTARIUS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeedPolitical sciencePublic prosecutorLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Notary deed can be used as written evidence in court (civil and criminal). The notary then saves the deed as a million deed which is part of the notary protocol. The principle of prudence is needed by the Notary in saving the deed of minuta until the Notary retires. However, the reality is that the minutta deed is often scattered because of many things, such as changing positions, lack of employee responsibility, or coercing majors. In fact, UUJN does not regulate the completion of damaged or missing minuta. The purpose of this paper is to determine the position of the notary deed as evidence (civil and criminal) and analyze the need for the actualization of UUJN related to digitalization of the deed of minutes by the notary public. Research results and conclusions are; First, the position of the notary deed as evidence in criminal cases (only limited to the strength of evidence) and civil (strength of birth, formal, and material evidence). Second, the need for the actualization of UUJN related to digitalization of notary deed by a notary because it has economic and legal benefits. Keywords: notary; minuta; deed; UUJN; digitization Abstrak Akta notaril yang dibuat oleh notaris dapat dijadikan sebagai alat bukti tertulis di persidangan (perdata maupun pidana). Notaris dalam hal ini kemudian menyimpan akta sebagai minuta akta yang merupakan bagian dari protokol notaris. Prinsip kehati-hatian sangat diperlukan oleh Notaris dalam menyimpan minuta akta sampai Notaris dinyatakan pensiun. Namun, kenyataannya seringkali minuta akta tercecer disebabkan banyak hal, seperti kantor berpindah, kurang bertanggungjawabnya karyawan kantor Notaris, kebakaran dan bencana alam (force majour). Kenyataannya, UUJN tidak mengatur mengenai penyelesaian minuta akta yang rusak atau hilang. Tujuan dari penulisan ini adalah untuk mengetahui kedudukan akta notaris sebagai alat bukti (perkara perdata maupun pidana) dan menganalisis perlunya reaktualisasi UUJN terkait digitalisasi minuta akta oleh notaris. Hasil penelitian dan kesimpulan dari penulisan ini adalah; pertama, kedudukan akta notaris sebagai alat bukti dalam perkara pidana (hanya sebatas kekuatan pembuktian) dan perdata (kekuatan pembuktian lahir, formil, dan materiil). Kedua, perlunya reaktualisasi UUJN terkait digitalisasi minuta akta oleh notaris dikarenakan secara ekonomis, penyimpanan protokol notaris bertujuan agar lebih efisien, mudah, dan lain sebagainya. Sedangkan ditinjau dari aspek hukumnya, dapat membantu dan memudahkan dalam proses hukum terutama hukum pembuktian yang berkaitan dengan alat bukti elektronik. Kata kunci : notaris; minuta; akta; UUJN; digitalisasi

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNOTARIUSSame topicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory StudiesFrench-language works237,207