Criticism of the Report of the Task Force on the Role of Psychology in the Criminal Justice System.

1980 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-109
Author(s):  
Ann S. McColskey
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Task Force

scholarly journals PERANAN KEJAKSAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DI NEGARA DEMOKRASI (Role of The Attorney General of Indonesia in Eradicating Corruption in State Democracy)

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 15
Author(s):  
Suharyo Suharyo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Local Officials ◽  
Strategic Position

PERANAN KEJAKSAAN REPUBLIK INDONESIADALAM PEMBERANTASAN KORUPSI DI NEGARA DEMOKRASI(Role of The Attorney General of Indonesia in Eradicating Corruption in State Democracy) The Attorney General of Indonesia plays a strategic position in corruption eradication. Since IndonesiaIndependent Day on 17 August 1945 until now, the attorney general keeps eradicate the corruption. As one of the elements of criminal justice system of the democracy state refers to the Act No.16/2004 on the Attorney General of Republic of Indonesia, and also a concern with the Act No.8/1981 on the Criminal Code (KUHAP). Corruption eradication is ruled and stipulated on the Act No.31/1999 on Corruption Eradication Jo the Act No.20/2001, and supported the Act No.8/2010 on the Criminal Act of Money Laundering . Questions of this research were what obstacles of corruption eradication in attorneys and how to make it effective? It was a normative-juridical method. It was  an impression that the Attorney General has no dare to enforce the law for the elite politician, local officials (governors,majors) because of their strong relationship with. This phenomenon triggered scholars to do long march and protest to the Attorney General to be consistent and responsive in corruption eradication. Good governance and bureaucracy reform had no big impact, the meaning of “Tri Atmaka” and “Tri Karma Adhyaksa” had truly not been absorbed and practiced, yet. Keywords: The Attorney General of Indonesia in eradicating corruption ABSTRAK Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia memegang posisi sangat strategis dalam pemberantasan korupsi. SejakProklamasi Kemerdekaan 17 Agustus 1945 sampai sekarang, Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia terus menerus melakukan pemberantasan korupsi. Sebagai salah satu unsur dari  sistem peradilan pidana (Criminal Justice System) di dalam negara demokrasi Kejaksaan RI mengacu pada Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kejaksaan RI, dan juga memperhatikan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP). Khusus untuk pemberantasan korupsi, diatur melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tidak Pidana Korupsi no Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001, dan ditunjang Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2010 Tentang Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. Adapun rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah apakah kendala yang melekat jajaran Kejaksaan dalam pemberantasan korupsi, serta Bagaimana mengefektifkan Kejaksaan RI dalam pemberantasan korupsi. Metode yang dipakai adalah yuridis normatif.Terdapat kesan, Kejaksaan RI sangat tumpul pada pelaku dari elit politik, dan pejabat daerah (Gubernur, Bupati/Walikota) yang mempunyai koneksi politik yang kuat.Sehingga tidaklah mengherankan, apabila di berbagai daerah, muncul aksi-aksi unjuk rasa dari kalangan mahasiswa yang menuntut Kejaksaan RI agar konsisten dan responsif dalam pemberantasan korupsi. Good Governance dan reformasi birokrasi, hanya berpengaruh positif, secara minimal. Makna Tri Atmaka, serta Tri Karma Adhyaksa, kurang diresapi dan kurang  diamalkan secara mendalam. Kata Kunci: Kejaksaan RI dalam pemberantasan korupsi

Reducing the Harm of Criminal Victimization: The Role of Restitution

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 450-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacy Hoskins Haynes ◽  
Alison C. Cares ◽  
R. Barry Ruback
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Economic Losses ◽  
Compensatory Mechanism ◽  
Court Order ◽  
Interpersonal Justice ◽  
Criminal Victimization ◽  
Do So

Restitution is a court-ordered payment by offenders to their victims to cover the victims’ economic losses resulting from the crime. These losses can be substantial and can harm victims and victims’ families both directly and indirectly. But most victims do not receive reparation for their injuries, both because judges do not always impose restitution and because of problems with collecting restitution payments, even if there is a court order to do so. In this article, we review the literature on restitution and suggest that this compensatory mechanism is necessary to restore victims to where they were before the crime occurred. But monetary restitution alone is not sufficient. Making victims whole requires not only financial compensation from the offender but also procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice from the criminal justice system.

One Role of the Social Scientist in the Courtroom: The Maria Pitchford Case

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-272
Author(s):  
Katherine Van Wormer
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Jury Selection ◽  
Recent Trial ◽  
The Social

Sociologists have been involved in various aspects of the criminal justice system. The author examines the role of the sociologist in jury selection. Using as a background her involvement in a recent trial, she discusses the basic strategies involved in selecting a jury.

Victimhood, Dignity, and the Criminal Justice System: A Comment

2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 301-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Sebba
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
System A ◽  
Meaningful Role ◽  
Alternative Remedies

While this comment primarily addresses the article by Anat Horovitz and Thomas Weigend on human dignity and victims' rights in the German and Israeli criminal process, it begins with a consideration of the role of the victim in other component parts of the criminal justice system, and in particular the substantive criminal law—a topic addressed in other articles included in this issue. There follows a review of the comparative analysis of the victim's role in Germany and Israel put forward by Horovitz and Weigend and a critique of the issues they raise, particularly as to the salience of the victim's procedural role. It is argued here that the victim should have a somewhat more meaningful role than that envisaged by these authors. The comment concludes with a brief consideration of the potential for the advancement of alternative remedies currently neglected by both systems, such as restorative justice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document