Replacement Of Law Research Articles

Идея отмирания права в раннесоветской теории права (1917–1930 гг.)

In the legal literature, the traditional idea is that Soviet legal scholars until the early 1930s rationally expected the withering away of law as socialism was being built. In this regard, this article aims to critically review the views on this problem that existed in the USSR and to check if such a theory (group of theories) really existed. To do this, the author checked the internal logic and detailing of the views of some leading Soviet legal philosophers (P. I. Stuchka, E. B. Pashukanis, M. A. Reisner, and I. P. Razumovsky). Their views on the problem of the withering away of the law were also compared with other elements of their scientific theories and with the provisions of classical Marxism. It has been established that none of the considered works contains a full-fledged scientific theory of the withering away of law. P. I. Stuchka never supported this idea, and in his works, he wrote about the “withering away” of only certain liberal legal doctrines (freedom of contract, the autonomy of will, etc.). E. B. Pashukanis, known as the most influential Soviet legal nihilist, argued that the law would be completely replaced by technical norms, but did not provide any explanation for this statement. In many contemporary phenomena of politics and economics, he saw signs of the degradation of law but did not explain in any way how this would lead to the withering away of law itself. The replacement of law by technical norms was also predicted by M. A. Reisner, but his view was even more general — the law should have disappeared by itself when universal equality and justice would have been established in society. The philosopher I. P. Razumovsky also described the withering away of law only in general and, apparently, saw it as nothing more than an ideological stamp. The inability to formulate a detailed theory of the withering away of law, we believe, demonstrates the stability of the Western tradition in the face of many years of determined attempts to deconstruct it.

Autonomous Management of Educational Units At Al-Islamiyah Education and Social Foundation (Yapisa) Tanggulangin District, Sidoarjo Regency

The National Education System Law No. 20 of 2003 as a refinement and replacement of Law No. 2 of 1989 strengthens the implementation of education decentralization, which was originally top down to bottom up, with the hope of improving the quality of education. Including the granting of autonomy in the management of educational units in foundations will provide broader opportunities for educational unit managers to find competitive strategies in the competitive era of achieving strong and independent educational outputs. This study aims to determine the extent of autonomy in the management of educational units in Al-Islamiyah educational and social foundations (yapisa). In this case the authors use qualitative phenomenological research methods, and historical methods. The data collection technique uses participatory observation, interviews and document review, while the data analysis uses descriptive. The results of this study, that the Foundation is very free in giving full autonomy to each education unit under its auspices. Most foundations develop their educational institutions, but educational institutions in Yapisa actually develop foundations.

Environmental Dispute Resolution Through Class Action Lawsuit

The procedural law of Class Action is a legal concept known in the Anglo-Saxon legal system (Common Law). Whilst this concept is not recognised in the Continental European legal system (Civil Law), likewise in Indonesian civil procedure that based on Herzien Inlandsch Reglement (H.I.R) and Rechtsreglement voor de Buitengewesten (RBg). Initially, the procedural law of class action in Indonesian legal system was arranged consecutively under Law No. 23 of 1997 (Environmental Protection Law), Law No. 8 of 1999 on Consumer Protection and Law No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry. The arrangement of class action lawsuit in the substantive law was inspired by the recognition of class action lawsuit in the United States through Article
 23 of the US Federal Rule of Civil Procedure prescribing that the requirements for filing class action lawsuit are as follows: numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. In Indonesia there is no procedural law setting out the class action lawsuit, thus Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2002 was enacted. The replacement of Law No. 23 of 1997 (Environmental Protection Law) by Law No. 32 of 2009 (Environmental Protection and Management Law) allows the application of the class action with reference to this Supreme Court Regulation. The arrangement of class action lawsuit in the Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2002 still encounters many challenges in its application. The initial process i.e. certification is very decisive whether the lawsuit can be accepted or is qualified as a class action lawsuit. In conjunction with this, the judges' active role is very important whilst waiting for a specific and adequate legislation to establish the class action procedure. Meanwhilst, the judges are supposed to patch up the Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2002.
 Keywords: Environmental Disputes, Procedural Law, Class Action Lawsuit

Actualization of Pancasila as the Foundation of Indonesian Political Law

Pancasila is a major cornerstone in the making of law (law and Legislation) with a new or replacement of law (political law), so that the values of the Deity, Humanity and Society (nationalistic; democratic; social justice) must be actualized into the substance of the law, the legal structure and legal culture to be built, is expected to strengthen national integration, democratization of law, achieve prosperity and social justice by putting pancasila, ranging from values, goals until the actualization of the various fields of existing law, whether criminal, civil, administrative and the other, as well as the internalization of the structures of law and legal culture of pancasila.