MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220660983 · doi:10.20473/mi.v5i1.27156

Kewenangan Penerapan Aturan Terhadap Tindak Pidana Asusila Yang Korbannya Anak

2022· article· en· W4220660983 on OpenAlex
Muhammad Rhazi, Iskandar A. Gani, Dahlan Dahlan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedia Iuris · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Social Justice Studies
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceLawLegislationHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractThis study aims to explain the handling of cases of immoral crimes whose victims are children in relation to the determination of the court to try and the authority of the investigation carried out by the National Police Investigators and the Aceh Wilayatul Hisbah Investigators associated with the concept of legal protection. The research method used is juridical empirical. Juridical research is using a statutory approach (dass sollen), while empirical research uses a field/interview approach (dass sein). The results of the study show that in Aceh Province in handling immoral crimes in which the perpetrators and victims are children, 2 (two) laws and regulations are applied, namely Law Number 35 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 23 of 2002 concerning Child Protection and Aceh Qanun Number 6 of 2014 concerning Jinayat Law. Qanun jinayat is a positive law which in its application still requires higher legislation with the aim of being guided by the scope of the judiciary so that the ideal concept can be clearly seen in handling cases related to jinayat law. Meanwhile, the Qanun jinayat is a derivative of Law Number 11 of 2006 concerning the Government of Aceh.Keywords: Aceh; Immoral; Disparity. AbstrakPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan penanganan perkara tindak pidana asusila yang korbannya anak kaitannya dengan penentuan pengadilan yang mengadili dan wewenang penyidikan yang dilakukan oleh Penyidik Polri dan Penyidik Wilayatul Hisbah Aceh dikaitkan dengan konsep perlindungan hukum. Adapun metode penelitian yang digunakan bersifat yuridis empiris. Penelitian yuridis adalah menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan (dass sollen), sedangkan penelitian empiris menggunakan pendekatan lapangan/wawancara (dass sein). Hasil penelitian bahwa di Provinsi Aceh dalam penanganan tindak pidana asusila yang pelaku maupun korbannya anak diterapkan 2 (dua) aturan perundang-undangan yaitu Undang-undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-undang Nomor 23 Tahun 2002 tentang Perlindungan Anak dan Qanun Aceh Nomor 6 Tahun 2014 tentang Hukum Jinayat. Qanun jinayat merupakan hukum positif yang dalam penerapannya masih memerlukan peraturan perundang-undangan yang lebih tinggi dengan tujuan untuk dipedomani oleh lingkup peradilan sehingga dapat dilihat secara jelas konsep ideal dalam penanganan perkara yang berkaitan dengan hukum jinayat. Sedangkan Qanun jinayat tersebut merupakan turunan dari Undang-undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2006 tentang Pemerintah Aceh.Kata Kunci: Aceh; Asusila; Disparitas.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.255 · 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