TUGAS UJIAN TENGAH SEMESTER

BAHASA INGGRIS

DOSEN PENGAMPU

KARTIKA.S,.M.Pd

DISUSUN OLEH

Wahyu Pratama

2221020410

UNIVERSITAS ISLAM NEGERI RADEN INTAN LAMPUNG

FAKULTAS SYARIAH

HUKUM TATA NEGARA

2022/2023
 PANCASILA
Pancasila is the ideology of the Republic of Indonesia, and the pearls of wisdom
contained in it should be fully implemented.
An Indonesian is a believer of the six major religions in the country: Islam,
Protestant, Catholic, Buddha, Hindu, and Konghuchu, for the first principle of
Pancasila is ‘Belief in God Almighty.’
Indonesia consists of more than 300 ethnic groups, but there is a harmonious
existence among these different groups.
Our motto is “Bhinneka Tunggal Ika” or the English equivalent is “Unity in
Diversity.”
Many Indonesian undertake humanitarian activities, for the second principle of
Pancasila is “Just and Civilized humanitarianism.”
Indonesians do not believe in the doctrine of communism, nor does the State
recognize the existence of the party in the country.
The third principle of Pancasila is “The Unity of Indonesia” and this principle
stresses the feelings of solidarity and being one nation in the minds of the people.
Indonesians reach a decision through consultation and consensus, for the fourth
principle of Pancasila is “Democracy based on Consultation and Consensus.”
The fifth principle of Pancasila is “Social Justice,” yet many Indonesian still live in
poverty.
Many forces have tried to destroy Pancasila as the basic ideology of the country,
but these forces have been successfully crushed.
Leaders of our country saw the need for implanting the State Ideology in the minds
of the people, so a course in the Directives and Implementation of Pancasila is
required.
Leaders of our country also feel the need for implementing the pearls of wisdom
contained in the five principles of Pancasila, so the People’s Consultative
Assembly decreed “Ketetapan MPR II, 1978,” officially known as P-4.
Pancasila should not only remain in Indonesian history books to be read only in a
while and to be regarded as a thing of the past, for Pancasila is the most valuable
possession of the state. The P-4 course was first given to government officials
from the lowest to the highest echelon, but now it is given also to the society at
large.
Pancasila should pervade all aspect of life in Indonesia, so the country is governed
and led by honest and ethical officials.
The P-4 course is comprised of lectures and discussions on the history of
Indonesia. Pancasila, The 1945 Constitution, The Guidelines of The States Policy,
and The Five-Year
Development Plan, and it also contains lectures on the interrelation of these Five
subject with regard to national development, equity, prosperity, and national
stability.

The Legal Aid Institution

The Legal Aid Institution’s mission is helping the poor regardless of their religion,
opinion or political ideology. This legal body consists of young, promising,
lawyers ready to assist those poor people needing to defend their own basic right.
Sometimes this body also has to undertake political and subversion cases. In doing
so, the young lawyers are considered acting against the authorities. However, they
have to stick to their basic principal-giving assistance to people who
are oppressed and in need of legal aid. The following is an illustration of how the
institution has helped the oppressed. Miss Sri Mersing lost her money in
a business venture was cheated by her business partner, who admitted having
received her money. Because she was a very influential man, Miss Mersing could
not do anything about it. Nevertheless, she did not give up hope. She went to the
Legal Aid Body for legal assistance. Through the advice of the lawyers in the
institution, Miss Mersing was able to take her ex-business partner to court.

Adat and Customary Law

The term ‘Adat’ has long been accepted by Indonesians and has become familiar to
Dutch jurist and ethnologists. It is still somewhat strange to the Anglo-American
reader. The translators of this work have given serious consideration to the choice
of an
English language equivalent; but no fitting English term was found. Translation of
the term with ‘Customary law’ is not only clumsy but implies a different in kind
from the law of civilized peoples – a distinction which is not justified in fact.
Indonesians have for many centuries lived under the humanitarian impress of
Hinduism and Islam; so, their law is part of a civilized heritage. ‘Native law’
would be adequate translation to distinguish adat law from Dutch law as it operates
in the Indies. But the word ‘native’ carries overtones of colonial snobbishness and
is distasteful to the resurgent feelings of an awakening Asia. By analogy with the
terminology adopted in respect to other parts of the world, it would be proper to
consider indigenous Indonesian law as ‘primitive’ law. But this term, too, has
unfortunate connotation and moreover, is not practical in the present instance,
because within Indonesian society one must distinguish between the adat of the
great majority and that of relatively small and unimportant tribes which really are
primitive in the usual meaning of that word. To call adat ‘primitive’ would be an
error, since the people have lived for more than a thousand years under the
influence of world religions and for three hundred years under the rule of a
Christian nation.

The Judge and His Profession

One must always remember that the judge is a person, and react to headache,
sleepless, nights, bores, rudeness, the opposite sex, and financial pressure as other
mortal humans do. The classic error is to mistake the body within the black robe for
an automation who will respond predictably to any stimulation. While some judges
have greater personal qualities than others, every judge has peaks and valleys.
The judge’s personality relate directly to the way he will handle courtroom
distraction. Few lay people understand how well the judge can see the courtroom from
his perch. The average courtroom does not exceed sixty feed, front to back, and unless
the judge is myopic he can monitor it all. Facial expression, fidgeting, whispering, and
a variety of ‘look’ are all observable. Many lawyers know this and, in an effort to
sway the judge, will feign shock, dismay, or surprise during their opponent’s
presentation. Experienced judges are rarely taken in by these dramatics; many are
offended by them, and will rebuke a lawyer for them, even in the jury’s presence.
Many judges work on unrelated paper during a tedious trial, particularly one without
a jury. Some distinguished public letters were written from the bench during dry
arguments. With modern time pressures on judges to produce, perfunctory orders
to be signed and draft of proposed opinions often find their way onto the bench as the
dreary questioning and argumentation continue. Most judges are loathe to cut off long
questioning forays of conceivable relevancy. There is a normal desire to permit
everyone to be heard out to the fullest. One should feel he has had his full day court,
regardless of the result. Moreover, tangential questioning is sometime profitable and
judges, in charting lawyers’ courses, have few guides to help in deciding in advance
whether the questioning will come to have worth.“

Order in the Court

Trial courtrooms are clearly no neighborhood social rooms. Their décor, featuring
highly polished wood with governmental crest and flags, is a reminder that this is a
hall of authority. Various people move officiously about, popping in and out of side
doors. If any doubt persist, it is challenged by the entry of the judge, an ordinary man
but cloaked in a ceremonial robe and a solemn look to the announcement of the court
official: “All rise. Hear ye, hear ye, this honorable court is now in session, Judge X
presiding. All drew near, give your attention and ye shall be heard. You may be
seated.” Something very official is going on and caution comes to mind quickly. This
seems like an easy place in which to get into trouble.
Aside from criminal trial, where armed officers may be in the courtroom and
occasionally their defendant charges may be manacled, courtroom decorum is
maintained by respect for the institution and no little awe. The witnesses walk
unescorted to the witness stand, the lawyers normally question in courteous
tones, and answer are similarly given; objections are made by the lawyers to the
judge, ruled upon and accepted with nothing more than a courteous explanatory
interchange, or an occasional exasperated objection by a lawyer.
In matrimonial dispute, there are times when an embattled husband and wife may
erupt into a shouting match, but order is customarily restored by a simple admonition
from the judge. However, in the corridors of courtroom, between sessions, more than
one wife’s lawyer has been the beneficiary of a punch in the mouth by an irate
husband.
The key to maintaining order in a court trial is the personal dignity of the judge. A
shouting judge, florid of face, or snidely accusatory, will have fewer tranquil
moments. Courteous judges, who avoid humor or sarcasm, run the best courtroom.
Blackrobed,
elevated in height above the courtroom floor, neat, serious, well spoken, surrounded
by flags and governmental seal, the judges hold great presiding advantage. Those
judges
with quiet but firm bearing, who stay within their pocket of advantages, are self-
generators of the respect they command.

Law and Its Accurate Perception

In our society, where iconoclasm flourishes, law continues to maintain misleading

holds on popular imagination. Law is perceived as an objective force for fairness
and justice, or a set fixed standard by which everyone’s conduct can be measured.
But neither is the case. Perhaps the need to believe feeds the belief itself; stability
and protection are eagerly sought in uncertain times of rising feelings of individual
vulnerability. Whatever the reason is, these popular perceptions are wildly
inaccurate, principally because they fail to take into account the actual nature of
the legal process and the critical effect of “Lawyering” in projecting the law. The
ideals are illusion; the law is what lawyers say it is.
Lawyers are reasonably obvious features of our legal system. But how many
people know what the law really is and what lawyers really do? What make the
members of this vocational group, who function not only in their profession but
also as leaders in government, business, and nonprofit institutional sectors, think as
they think and do as they do? There are compelling reasons to seek better
understanding, because the
working of law is a public monopoly, and exclusive franchise for the guild of
lawyers, a great social grant by the many to the few. Despite the immense social
significance of lawyers, not much is told, in the endless ranks of moldering tomes
in our libraries, to
laymen of lawyers.

Legal Foundations and Organization of Courts of Justice

Article 24 of the Constitution stipulates that judicial powers are vested in the
hands of a Supreme Court and other judiciary bodies established by Law. The
official explanation of the Article clearly shows that the purpose of the Article is
 to create the foundation for an independent judicature as one of the pillars of a
democratic state based on the rule of law.
The Supreme Court stands at the apex of this independent complex of the state
organs which consist of all the court of justice throughout the country. At the
present time, there are in Indonesia Four Branches of the Judicature:
1. General courts of justice;
2. Religious courts of justice;
3. Military courts of justice
4. Government administrative courts of justice.
The courts falling within the general judicature try all criminal and civil cases in
which any person within the territory of the state is involved. The court falling
within the religious judicature tries civil cases in which the disputing parties are
person of the Islam faith and which, according to living reality in the field of law,
concern matters that should be judged according to the tenets of the Law of the
Islam Religion (marital affairs and, in some regions outside Java, inheritance
affairs).
The court falling within the military judicature try criminal cases where the
accused is a member of the Armed Forces. The Courts falling within the
government administrative judicature try cases in which someone bring an action
against the Government for infringement of the law or misuse of powers by state
organ or a government organ resulting in losses for the person concerned.
During the Dutch colonial era, the judicature suffered from a dualism because there
were two categories of law courts: the European courts which tried cases where the
accused was European or, in civil cases, where the person against whom the action
was brought was a European or a Chinese, and the Indonesia courts which tried
cases where the accused or the person against whom the action was brought was a
native Indonesia.
The stipulation that Chinese persons were sued in the court of justice set up to try
Europeans came about because of the fact that practically the entire European
Civil Code had been made applicable to Chinese.
This dualism which was based upon discrimination between Europeans and
Indonesians was brought to an end by the Japanese Army because its occupation
of this country.
The general courts of the justice by the Dutch during Colonial times were not
established in all parts of the country because in many regions, the people were
“left to enjoy their own justice.” In such regions, law was administered by “Native
Court” which was also known as “Customary law courts.”
These courts had existed in the Indonesian society during ancient times and were
run by the village elders. But after the Dutch East Indies Government came into
being, they were placed under the control of a local government official of the
Dutch nationality (Known as a “Controleur”).
In this way, the Dutch sought to run their administration in Indonesia at the lowest
possible costs of Dutch interests in the regions in question (Most of which lay
outside Java) were still very limited.
The Indonesian government, being obligated by the Constitution to set up an
independent judicature, enacted Law No. 1/1951 which brought about uniformity
among courts of justice throughout the whole country.Among other things, this
law abolished the customary law courts referred to above.

The Constitution of The Republic of Indonesia/ 1945 Constitution

In UUD 1945, Article I paragraph (3) it is affirmed that, “The state of Indonesia
shall be based on the rule of law.” As a law-based state, hence the state is obliged
to arrange orderliness of the society and the same time is obliged to strive common
prosperity for all the people. To realize it, government releases various state
regulation called “Law and Regulation.” All the law and regulation must be based
on UUD 1945 and at the same time function to implement provision which is
written in UUD 1945.
The 1945 Constitution is the highest legal authority in Indonesia, of which
executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government must defer to it. The
constitution was written in July and August 1945, when Indonesia was emerging
from Japanese
control at the end of World War II. It was abrogated by the Federal Constitution of
1949 and the Provisional Constitution of 1950, but restored after the President
Soekarno’s decree on 5 July 1959. During the 32 years old Soeharto’s
Administration, the constitution had never been amended. Soeharto refused to
countenance any changes to the constitution and the People’s Consultative
Assembly passed a law in 1958 requiring national referendum for the constitution
amendments.
After the Soeharto’s fall in 1998, the people Consultative Assembly amended the
constitution four times in 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002. Important amendments
include the direct presidential election by the people (Third Amendment) and the
presidential office term from unlimited to only two (First Amendment), the
regulation of which had made the possibility for Soeharto’s Administration held in
office for more than five terms.
After the last amendment, the people Representative Council gained more power to
control the executive branch, the regional Representative Council was established,
and regional government was recognized in a section and expanded about Civil
Right among other changes. Currently, the Constitution consist of 16 Sections and
36 Article.

NOUN (RED)
1.TIME 21. RESULT
2. PEOPLE 22. PERSON
3. DAY 23. COUNTRY
4. WAY 24. BODY
6. THING 25. MONEY
7. LIFE 26. WORD
8. WORD 27. RIGHT
9. SYSTEM 28. FACT 40. POWERS
10. WORK 29. LAW 41. CHANGES
11. MAN 30. REASON
12. GROUP 31. INDONESIA
13. STATE 32. PEOPLE
14. EXPERIENCE 33. NOW
15. MEMBERS 34. SHE
16. QUESTION 35. PEOPLE
17. BOOKS 36. FACT
18. POWERS 37. COUNTRY
19. PROCESS 38. PERSON
20. CHANGES 39. WAY

PRONOUN (BLUE)
1.YOUR 11. YOU
2. THEY 12. THAT
3. THEIR 13. THIS
4. ITS 14. WHICH
5. OUR 15. THESE
6. THOSE 16. HIS
7. HER 17. SOME
8. SOMETHING 18. WHERE
9. SOMEONE 19. SAME
10. ITSELF 20. NOTHNG

ADVERB (GREEN)
1.ALSO 6. EVEN
2. JUST 7. MOST
3. OUT 8. REALLY
4. MORE 9. STILL
5. VERY 10. ALWAYS

ADJECTIVE (YELLOW)
1.BEST 6. EASY
2. BETTER 7. IMPORTANT
3. CLEARLY 8. KIND
4. CLUMSY 9. LARGE
5. DIFFERENT 10. POOR

PREPOSITION (PURPLE)
1.ABOUT
2. ABOVE
3. AFTER
4. AMONG
5. BUT
6. BY
7. BETWEEN
8. BECAUSE OF
9. DURING
10. FOLLOWING
11. FOR
12. FROM
13. GIVEN
14. INTO
15. OUTSIDE
16. SINCE
17. THROUGH
18. UNDER
19. WITH
20. WITHOUT