Background: Providing instant care for life-saving or rescuing the injured or sick people requires having a considerable amount of first aid (FA) knowledge and experience. The current work sheds some light on the current status of Saudi family members’ first aid knowledge and experience aiming at reaching a sustainable decrease in the number of deaths and unnecessary losses. Methodology: A questionnaire was used to collect (N=447) participants’ information 35.6% (159/447) males and 64.4% (288/447) females from a number of Saudi cities. The collected data were analyzed using IBM SPSS v 25. Results: The results showed that 48.3% (216/447) of the participants have good FA experience and only 7.2% (32/447) have excellent FA experience. The majority of the participants 65.3% (292/447) were not FA-certified, 22.8% (102/447) attended an FA course, and 11.9% (53/447) were certified first aiders. 93.7% (419/447) of the participants think that the community’s FA awareness is low. The results also reported statistically significant association between being related to health care sector and FA experience χ2(3) = 56.8, p = 0.000, witnessing accidents and gender v χ2(7) = 19.1, p = 0.008, and having got FA tools and FA experience χ2(3) = 28.5, p = 0.000. Conclusion: The current study’s results along with numerous similar research provoke a public outcry to take practical steps towards enhancing a sustainable community’s FA education through campaigns, workshops, and training courses.

The objectives of this study are to analyze the weaknesses in the regulation of False Statements In Corruption Cases Pretrial Currently and how to reconstruct the regulation of False Statements In Corruption Case Pretrial As Quasi-Delict based on the value of justice, using the constructivism paradigm. The approach method used in this research is social legal research, concept approach, and comparative approach. The results of the study found that the Weaknesses is regarding the fact that whistleblowers (reporters) and justice collaborators (who participate in providing the information) have actually been included in the scope of parties that need to be protected in Law no. 13 of 2006, however, due to the lack of strict provisions, problems arose in its implementation, not to mention the long process of making the minutes of examination, the low understanding of law enforcement officials in the pretrial mechanism, and the low public awareness in giving correct witness testimony. Therefore, The Reconstruction proposed by the author is in the form of harmonization of the article, Article 174 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code by highlighting the punishment in the form of a minimum sentence of 3 (three) years and maximum 12 (twelve) years and/or a fine of at least Rp. 150,000,000.00 (one hundred fifty million rupiahs) and a maximum of Rp. 600,000,000.00 (six hundred million rupiahs) for false statement.

The purpose of this research is to find the weakness of the Juvenile Crime System and how to reconstruct the law based on dignified justice in socio-legal research, using the constructivism paradigm. The approach method used in this research is social legal research, concept approach, and comparative approach. Research result shows the Weaknesses that causes the law cannot be implemented properly because the provisions on the terms of Diversion regarding the limitation of criminal penalties under 7 years in Article 7 of the Juvenile Crime System (SPPA) Law which are based on the application of the article during investigations and prosecutions allow for subjective views in addition to the fact that there are several law enforcers who do not implement a legal provision as they should. Therefore, the legal reconstruction is in the form of the Elimination of the conditions for imprisonment under 7 (seven) years in Article 7 paragraph (2) letter (a) of the SPPA Law. The general principles contained in the Convention on the Rights of the Child should be taken into consideration to amend or remove conditional restrictions on diversion for imprisonment under 7 years because they have deviated from the essence of children's rights and the general principles contained in the Convention on the Rights of the Child.