scholarly journals Truth and procedural fairness in Chinese criminal procedure law

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-315
Author(s):  
Alexander Shytov ◽  
Peter Duff
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
Rapid Transformation

Chinese criminal procedural law has recently been undergoing rapid transformation. While the search for ‘truth’, embodied in a confession by the accused, has traditionally dominated the criminal process, efforts are now being made to secure more procedural fairness. This is exemplified by the introduction of rules to render inadmissible at trial confessions extorted from suspects by ill treatment. Unsurprisingly, it has proved difficult to shift the mindsets of the players in the criminal justice process. The new rules have not been fully implemented in many respects and there is still confusion over the criteria to be used by the courts in making decisions about inadmissibility. Further, it has proved difficult to enable defence lawyers to play a more active role in defending their clients and to render it normal for witnesses to testify at trial. This handicaps the drive to secure a better balance between the search for truth and procedural fairness in the Chinese criminal trial.

scholarly journals REKONSEPTUALISASI TAFSIR ASAS PRADUGA TAK BERSALAH

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Saiful Aziz
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Preventive Effort ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
Basic Philosophy

ABSTRAK            Asas praduga tak bersalah dianggap  hanya  untuk  dan  berlaku bagi kegiatan yang berkaitan  dengan  proses  peradilan pidana. Sehingga terjadi ketidakpedulian masyarakat terhadap asas tersebut. Asas  praduga tak bersalah  di  Indonesia  dulu terdapat  di  dalam  Pasal 8 Undang-Undang No. 14 Tahun 1970 tentang Ketentuan-Ketentuan Pokok Kekuasaan Kehakiman. Meskipun tidak secara eksplisit menyatakan hal yang sama, asas tersebut  diutarakan  di  dalam  Pasal 66 Undang-Undang No.8 Tahun 1981 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP).Penegakkan hukum merupakan salah satu upaya untuk menciptakan tata tertib, keamanan dan ketentraman dalam masyarakat, baik itu merupakan usaha pencegahan maupun merupakan pemberantasan atau penindakan setelah terjadinya pelanggaran hukum. Untuk mencapai sasaran tersebut maka peraturan perundang-undangan menjadi dasar hukum bagi langkah dan tindakan dari penegak hukum harus sesuai dengan dasar falsafah negara dan pandangan hidup Bangsa Indonesia yaitu Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 (UUD 1945). Dengan demikian, Perlunya rekonseptualisasi atas tafsir asas praduga tidak bersalah (presumption of innocence) yang selama ini dianut KUHAP.        Kata kunci: Tafsir, Asas, Praduga tidak Bersalah.                                               AbstractThe principle of innocence presumption is presumed only for and applicable to activities relating to the criminal justice process. So there is a lack of concern for the community towards the principle. The principle of innocence presumption in Indonesia was previously contained in Article 8 of Law no. 14 of 1970 on the Basic Provisions of Judicial Power. Although it does not explicitly state the same, the principle was articulated in Article 66 of Law No.8 Year 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP).Law enforcement is one of the efforts to create order, security and peace in society, whether it is a preventive effort or is the eradication or repression after the violation of law. To achieve these targets, the legislation should be the legal basis for the actions and actions of law enforcers to be in accordance with the basic philosophy of the state and the Indonesian life view of Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution (1945 Constitution). Thus, the need for a reconceptualization of the interpretation of the presumption of innocence principle adopted by the Criminal Procedure Code.Keywords: Tafsir, Principle, Presumption Presumption of Innocence

scholarly journals The Admissibility of Scientific Expert Evidence Under Indonesian Criminal Justice System

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 152
Author(s):  
Wanodyo Sulistyani
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Process Reliability ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
The Impact

In many cases, such as corruption and forestry-related crimes, an expert has a significant role in explaining the impact of the crime. For instance, scientific expert evidence is required to disclose about the ecological destruction that occurred due to the defendant's criminal activities. In practices, the issue with scientific expert evidence is supposed to be about its admissibility in court. For this issue, the U.S. Court applies Rules of Evidence in considering the admissibility of scientific expert evidence at trial. Those are some requirements (prong test) to be met before expert testimony is admissible. In contrast, the Indonesian Criminal Procedural Law (KUHAP) or other laws do not set any prong test for presenting specialist scientific evidence to be acceptable. Lack of such proof may impact criminal justice process reliability and place expert under vulnerable position. Therefore, this paper will explore the issue on scientific expert evidence under Indonesian criminal law as well as its consequences and impacts for the Indonesian criminal justice process.

scholarly journals Institute of Returning a Criminal Case to the Prosecutor in the System of Criminally-Remedial Means, Ensuring the Victim's Right to Protection from Crime and Access to Justice

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 512-526
Author(s):  
Tatyana Ryabinina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process

The article deals with current and controversial issue in the criminal science, specifically the need for the Russian criminal justice process to have an institute to return a criminal case to the procurator at the stage of appointment and preparation of the court hearing. The author emphasizes that during the continuance of RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure, a special emphasis was put on it as a guarantee of the delivery of justice and the rights of the participants in the proceedings, that put in place the arrangements necessary for an effective court trial. The goal of modern judicial reform is to establish an independent judiciary whose main function is the delivery of justice which can be implemented in criminal proceedings only in adversary criminal proceedings. Since the beginning of its implementation, attitudes towards the institution of returning a criminal case by a court to a procurator to correct lacunae, loopholes, contradictions, irregularities or flaws in pre-trial proceedings have changed dramatically. It is perceived as an attribute of the courts prosecutorial activities, which is inconsistent with its new role as an independent body to resolve legal disputes between a state and an individual awaiting for a founded and equitable decision from the court. Despite critical rhetoric towards the institution of returning the criminal case to the prosecutor, the author argues that it is necessary due to specific status of the first judicial phase in a staged system of Russian criminal justice process. This institute creates conditions for monitoring and verification activities of judges at this stage, and the corresponding authority of judges to determine the future course of criminal cases brought before the courts. However, the author concludes that the task of rectifying the shortcomings of the prosecution can be addressed at the preliminary hearing introduced by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to resolve various contentious issues. When it is impossible to remove the obstacles that prevent the court from conducting a trial, the judge may, taking into account the views of the parties, decide to return the case to the prosecutor.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTASI ASAS LEX SPECIALIS DEROGAT LEGI GENERALI DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA

2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 503
Author(s):  
Shinta Agustina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
Cumulative Model

This study aims to assess and analyze the application of the principle of lex specialis the derogat legi generali in the Criminal Justice System related to the stages in the criminal justice process, and the form of the indictment in applying the principle of lex specialis the derogat legi generali. The method used is empirical juridical with descriptive analytical. The result shows that this principle is applied in criminal cases that violating the general and special criminal provisions in the Penal Code, the general criminal provisions in the Penal Code and special criminal provisions outside the Penal Code, as well as criminal cases that violating two special criminal acts outside the Penal Code. Regarding the fase of criminal procedure in handling the case under this principle, it is implemented in the adjudication process, using the subsidiarity or cumulative model of chargingPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji dan menganalisis penerapan asas lex specialis derogat legi generali dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana terkait dengan tahapan dalam proses peradilan pidana, dan bentuk surat dakwaan dalam menerapkan asas lex xpecialis derogat legi generali tersebut. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode  yuridis empiris yang bersifat deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian memperlihatkan bahwa asas lex specialis derogat legi generali diterapkan dalam perkara pidana yang mempertemukan ketentuan pidana umum dan khusus dalam KUHP, ketentuan pidana umum dalam KUHP dan ketentuan pidana khusus di luar KUHP, serta perkara pidana yang mempertemukan dua atau lebih ketentuan pidana khusus di luar KUHP. Berkenaan dengan tahapan dalam sistem peradilan pidana, asas ini diterapkan dalam tahap adjudication, yang mengharuskan surat dakwaan dibuat dalam model subsidiaritas atau kumulatif

scholarly journals Problems with Online Criminal Justice in Criminal Procedure Law Due to the Covid-19 Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 436
Author(s):  
Ida Bagus Gde Subawa
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

The world is in crisis due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Corona Virus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) is a disease that was first discovered in the city of Wuhan, China. The transmission of Covid-19 in the People's Republic of China (PRC) occurred in 2019 and caused the death of Chinese citizens. By early 2020, the spread had spread to every country, including Indonesia. The wide spread of Covid-19 throughout Indonesia has resulted in the government declaring a health emergency and implementing a lockdown policy by limiting activities that trigger the massive spread of the Covid-19 virus. Activities that were initially carried out offline must be carried out online, and one of these activities is court proceedings. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, every activity, including the judiciary, is carried out online. This study aims to examine the problems that occur as a result of the implementation of online criminal justice in criminal procedural law. This research is descriptive research with a literature study method. The results of the study show that the implementation of online trials creates problems that are considered inconsistent with several principles and contrary to the Criminal Procedure Code, some of which are the validity of evidence in court, then there is an examination of the defendant in court until the last one is the personnel and equipment. which is not supported. Another problem is the Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia No. 4 of 2020 concerning the Administration and Trial of Criminal Cases in Courts Electronically which is contrary to the principles of Courts Open to the Public and Quick Trials.

scholarly journals Fungsi Keterangan Ahli Dalam Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan

JURNAL BELO ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-175
Author(s):  
Sherly Adam
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Strength Of Evidence ◽  
Expert Information ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
Investigation Process ◽  
Court Hearing

The disclosure of a criminal case, especially the criminal act of pembuhunan very difficult, at least there are three things that can not be separated because it involves the validity or validity of a court decision, namely: a system of evidence embraced by procedural law, evidence and strength of evidence and evidence that will Strengthening the evidence presented in court. The function of expert information in the proving of murder offenses as evidence in the criminal justice process is required from the examination of the case both in the investigation process and in the court hearing is very important and necessary, especially to assist the investigator, prosecutor or judge in disclosing a case A very complex, complex assassination.

The Criminal Process

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liz Campbell ◽  
Andrew Ashworth ◽  
Mike Redmayne
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
The Law ◽  
Normative Issues ◽  
Area Of Study

The Criminal Process continues to provides a reflective, contextualized consideration of doctrinal, practical, and normative issues in criminal processes and procedures. The text draws on arguments from the law, research, policy, and principle, to present an overview of this area of study. It focuses on England and Wales, with occasional comparative references. The book includes new coverage of contemporary issues, such as the disclosure of evidence in criminal trials and the treatment of victims, and on diversity and discrimination within the criminal justice process. Further reading suggestions and discussion questions are included at the end of each chapter.

Navigating through the effects of ‘Cracked Trials’

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 136-149
Author(s):  
Kevin Kwok-yin Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Sliding Scale ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process

‘Cracked trials’ have been identified as a major problem in the criminal justice process, causing wastage of resources and time for all parties involved. The sliding scale of sentence discounts was implemented in England and Wales to tackle the problem of ‘cracked trials’ through providing the greatest amount of sentence reduction for earlier guilty pleas and thereby discouraging defendants from entering late guilty pleas. The sliding scale has been recently implemented or is being considered by other common law jurisdictions. This article examines how legal practitioners in Hong Kong have navigated around the adverse effects of cracked trials prior to the implementation of the sliding scale and argues how the sliding scale of sentence discounts is problematic. The findings offer insights regarding strategies and reforms on other aspects of the criminal procedure in responding to late guilty pleas.

scholarly journals SAKSI AHLI SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI DALAM HUKUM ACARA PIDANA INDONESIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 1423
Author(s):  
Luh Putu Kristyanti
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Documentary Evidence ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
Court Proceedings

Keterangan ahli/ saksi ahli merupakan salah satu alat bukti dalam hukum acara pidana Indonesia. Perlu ditelusuri lebih mendetail perihal keterangan ahli serta kondisi saat keterangan ahli termasuk alat bukti saksi atau alat bukti surat. Penelitian ini akan difokuskan pada peran saksi ahli dalam proses peradilan di pengadilan dalam memperoleh keadilan materiil. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode normatif dengan analisa kualitatif. Keterangan ahli dalam proses peradilan pidana jika diberikan secara tertulis termasuk pada alat bukti surat, namun ketika diberikan secara lisan di persidangan maka termasuk alat bukti keterangan saksi. Expert statement / expert witness is one of the evidence in Indonesian criminal procedure law. It needs to be explored in more detail regarding expert testimony and conditions when expert testimony includes witness evidence or letter evidence. This research will focus on the role of expert witnesses in court proceedings in obtaining material justice. This study uses a normative method with qualitative analysis. Expert testimony in the criminal justice process, if given in writing, includes documentary evidence, but when it is given orally in court, it includes evidence for witness testimony.

scholarly journals Taking trauma seriously

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Ellison ◽  
Vanessa E Munro
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Current Trial ◽  
Trauma Informed ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process ◽  
Victims Of Crime ◽  
Victim Participation ◽  
The Government

Over the last two decades successive governments in England and Wales have stated a commitment to placing victims of crime at the heart of the criminal justice agenda. A raft of polices and reforming measures have been introduced with the declared aim of improving the experience and treatment of victims within the criminal process. Despite these developments, the government has recently conceded that the criminal justice process has continued to fall short—whether in relation to helping victims to recover in the aftermath of a crime or supporting them through the stresses of investigation and trial. In this article we argue that applying a trauma-informed lens to evaluate victim-centred initiatives helps to explain the failure of victim policy in England and Wales to fully deliver on its promise. We highlight the barriers that experiences of trauma can present to effective victim participation and the extent to which current trial processes are often liable to exacerbate rather than ameliorate trauma amongst a broad constituency of victims.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document