scholarly journals Fulfillment of Defendant's Rights in PERMA Number 4 of 2020 reviewed from the Principle of Due Process of Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-104
Author(s):  
Dewi Bella Juniarti
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Due Process Of Law ◽  
Limited Scope ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The purpose of this study is to find out and analyze the defendant's rights and the obstacles to their fulfillment through the principle of due process of law. The defendant's rights are contained in Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 of 2020 concerning Administration and Trial of Criminal Cases in Courts Electronically. It was considered that during the Covid-19 pandemic, the trial was conducted electronically due to the emergence of public social restrictions. This research was conducted using the juridical-normative method by examining library materials and secondary data through a previous study of laws and regulations, books, and research results. The deviations of the fulfillment of the defendant's rights in the electronic trial from those previously contained in the Criminal Procedure Code occur because of the limited scope regulated by Supreme Court Regulation 4/2020 that concerning electronic trials, so it is considered difficult to implement the defendant's rights in practice fully. Non-optimal fulfillment of the defendant's rights indicates that the due process of law principle cannot be applied in electronic trials, so it is necessary to update regulations regarding electronic trials in Indonesia to optimize the to optimize the development of national law that considered the perspective of justice.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTASI TUGAS HAKIM PENGAWAS DAN PENGAMAT DALAM PENGAWASAN DAN PENGAMATAN TERHADAP NARAPIDANA (Kajian di Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Klas II A Purwokerto)

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dessy Perdani Yuris PS
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Internal Resistance ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court

The implementation of court judgments needs to be observed and perceived, thus the birth of Supervisor and Observer Judge Institution by Law No. 8 of 1981. The position of a Judge is not simply responsible for imposition of punishment, but also have to responsible for completion of punishment term by inmates in Correctional Institute by appropriate pattern and program of counseling. Besides in article 277 KUHAP till article 288 KUHAP it is charged another task as supervisor and observer of the court decision. The research results show that the implementation of the Supervisory Judge task and Observers in the execution of court decisions in Purwokerto Penitentiary is based on the Criminal Procedure Code Article 277 through Article 283 Criminal Procedure Code, the implementing regulations of the Supreme Court Circular No. RI. No. 7 of 1985. Supervisory Judge in the performance of duties and Observers in Purwokerto Penitentiary still met the constraints that are internal or external, internal resistance from law enforcement and the factors of factor means or facilities. Then the external barriers are the ruling factor.Keywords : Supervisor and Observer Judge, Purwokerto Penitentiary and prisoner

scholarly journals Pembuktian Penetapan Tersangka Dalam Persidangan Praperdilan

JURNAL BELO ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 218-227
Author(s):  
Steven Makaruku
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
Minimum Principle ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Due Process Of Law

The Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) is very different from Herziene Inlands Reglement (HIR), the Criminal Procedure Code adopts the principle of due process of law, which protects the rights of a suspect. Pretrial is an institution that oversees and can judge whether or not the act of determining the suspect conducted by the investigator is in accordance with the minimum principle of proof and in accordance with Article 183 and Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

scholarly journals ASPEK HUKUM PENINJAUAN KEMBALI LEBIH DARI SATU KALI DALAM PERKARA PIDANA (PERSPEKTIF PENEGAKAN KEADILAN, KEPASTIAN DAN KEMANFAATAN HUKUM)

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 335
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Matters

Constitutional Court Decision No. 34 / PUU-XI / 2013 has opened the space PK is not just one time as provided for by the Article 268 paragraph (3) Criminal Procedure Code so that PK can be done many times during found and submission of PK Novum although it has done previously. Perspective is the basis of this decision is justice. Responding to the verdict of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court publishes SEMA No. 7 Year 2014 on Reconsideration Request Submission In Criminal Case. Through the SEMA Supreme Court warned that provisions PK only once outside the Article 268 Criminal Procedure Code which was canceled by the Constitutional Court, therefore, PK criminal cases (in a similar case) is more than 1 (one) can not be accepted. Restrictions on the desired PK criminal case the Supreme Court is to provide legal certainty in the process of final settlement of criminal matters. Government through Minister of Law and Human Rights take strategic steps in resolving the legal expediency vision polemic filing legal remedies PK criminal cases, by coordinating state agencies and relevant ministries so as to produce an agreement that filing PK many times can not be executed until the issuance of PP. Therefore still valid set forth in the Judicial Authority Law and the Law on the Supreme Court.Keywords : Legal Aspects, Reconsideration, Criminal Case

scholarly journals Investigation of Crime Committed by a Notary with the Approval of the Honorary Board of Notaries

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 822
Author(s):  
Wirman Wirman ◽  
Elwi Danil ◽  
Azmi Fendri
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Approval Process ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Descriptive Data ◽  
Procedure Code

Proof of indication of crime from an authentic deed made by a notary requires the presence of a notary in the examination of criminal cases starting from the level of investigation, prosecution by the prosecutor, until proof through examination at the trial. The presence of a notary who is indicated to commit crime is very determined from the formal and material aspects. This study employs an empirical juridical approach which means looking at the implementation of the provisions and theories that become references to the discussion using primary and secondary data. Based on the results of the study, the descriptive data shows that the concept of regulation in the investigation of crime carried out by notary is closely related to the regulation of the duties and authorities of the notary as determined by Law on Notary Position through an audit approval process by the Honorary Board of Notaries which is technically specified in the Ministry Regulation Law and Human Rights No. 7 of 2016. It means that approval is fundamental after the request from the investigator. Furthermore, it is processed in accordance with the procedures specified in the provisions of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. On the contrary, the provisions of the criminal procedure are still guided by the Criminal Procedure Code. Meanwhile, the form of a notary liability on the deed that he/she has made is a notary liability to the extent of the authority he/she has in carrying out the profession as a deed-making official; unless the notary makes a mistake or negligence so that the deed is detrimental to the appearers. The liability of a notary can be in the form of civil, administrative and criminal liability.

scholarly journals Mekanisme Penyimpanan dan Pemusnahan Barang Sitaan Narkotika (Studi Kasus Pada Kejaksaan Negeri Badung)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-319
Author(s):  
I Putu Krisna llham Wiantama ◽  
I Nyoman Gede Sugiartha ◽  
Ida Ayu Putu Widiati
Keyword(s):  
Secondary Data ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
The Public ◽  
Delegation Of Authority ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Force

There are many criminal cases of Narcotics in the jurisdiction of the Badung Prosecutor's Office, the procedure for storing confiscated objects of the State (Rupbasan) is regulated in Article 44 of the Criminal Procedure Code, then the destruction of confiscated Narcotics is carried out seven days after obtaining a court envoy who has permanent legal force as provisions of Law number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics. However, the implementation of this law still appears to be constrained by its implementation in the field. This study aims to explain the legal rules for storing and destroying confiscated Narcotics at the Badung Public Prosecutor's Office and describing the process of storing and destroying confiscated Narcotics at the Badung District Court. This study was designed using a normative method, namely examining library materials in relation to cases through a statutory approach. The data used are primary and secondary data. Data were collected by interviewing and documentation. The results showed the legal rules for the storage of confiscated Narcotics at Kasiswa Badung, according to Article 44 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, Perka BNN No. 7/2010, while for Destruction is regulated based on SE.IA Number: SE-018 / A / JA / 08/2015 dated 21 August 2015 is one of the legal bases, then the mechanism for storing and destroying confiscated Narcotics objects begins with the acceptance of delegation of authority from investigators to the public prosecutor to District Prosecutor's Office Badung by presenting the defendant and evidence to the District Prosecutor's Office Badung Badung. If the trial process has been completed and has retained legal force, the officer begins to collect and record various confiscated objects that will be destroyed, in this case divided according to the types of confiscated objects.

scholarly journals EKSISTENSI PERSIDANGAN ONLINE DITENGAH PANDEMI COVID19 DALAM PERKARA PIDANA DI INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 320
Author(s):  
Hanafi Hanafi ◽  
Muhammad Syahrial Fitri ◽  
Fathan Ansori
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Two Alternatives

Following the background, the problems in this study are, first, the mechanism for implementing procedural law in E-Court for criminal cases in Indonesia, secondly how E-Court accommodates the process of proof in criminal cases in Indonesia. The method used in this research is pure legal research, which refers to and bases on legal norms and principles, applicable laws and regulations, legal theories and doctrines, jurisprudence, and other literature that are relevant to the topic. The results of this study are, firstly, the mechanism for implementing E-Court procedural law is regulated in the Supreme Court Regulation 4/2020 on the Administration and Trial of Criminal Cases in Electronic Courts provides 2 (two) alternatives for conducting trials in criminal cases, namely Normal Courts and Electronic Courts. Such matters are not previously regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code or other procedural regulations. Second, concerning the process of proofing evidence in criminal cases in E-Court still follows the provisions of the normal criminal procedure law and has the same value or power of evidence as normal trials.

Bantuan Hukum Cuma-Cuma Bagi Tersangka yang Tidak Mampu Pada Tingkat Penyidikan

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rio Saputra ◽  
Mokhammad Najih
Keyword(s):  
Secondary Data ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Study Techniques ◽  
The Right

<p><em>Suspects have the right to obtain legal assistance, especially for suspects who are classified as economically disadvantaged in accordance with Article 56 of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). The facts show that there are many irregularities in the implementation of legal aid, therefore it is necessary to know about the implementation of free legal aid for suspects who are incapacitated at the level of investigation and the factors that become obstacles in the implementation of legal aid. This legal research is an empirical legal research and this research is descriptive in nature. The data used are primary data and secondary data. The techniques used to collect data were document study techniques and interview techniques. Inhibiting factors affecting the implementation of free legal aid for suspects who are unable at the level of investigation can be classified and differentiated into 3 factors, namely, legal substance, legal structure, and legal culture).</em></p><p><strong><em>Keywords: </em></strong><em>Legal Aid, Criminal Cases</em></p>

Maximum Duration of the Measures of Remand Detention in Custody and House Arrest in Criminal Cases

De Jure ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Salkova ◽  
◽  
Yanko Roychev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
Maximum Duration ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Maximum Period

The maximum duration of the detention in custody and house arrest measures in criminal cases is researched. A number of issues have been considered regarding the calculation of the term and its initial and final moments, including the hypotheses related to the returning of the case to the prosecutor by the court, the taking of the measures against an accused party detained on different grounds, as well as in view of a modification of the legal qualification of the indictment, establishing a different maximum duration under Art. 63, para. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Code. An emphasis has been placed on the disputable aspect of the duration of the period in regard to underage accused parties. A necessity to introduce a maximum period of detention in custody and house arrest,including also the court phase of the trial, has been acknowledged.

USING RESULTS OF STING OPERATION IN CRIMINAL CASES PROVING

2021 ◽  
pp. 132-136
Author(s):  
Кирилл Иванович ЛАРИН
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Sting Operation

В статье рассматриваются проблемные вопросы, связанные с использованием в качестве доказательств результатов оперативного эксперимента. Предлагается отказаться от проведения оперативного эксперимента по инициативе оперативных подразделений и допустить его проведение исключительно в рамках рассмотрения сообщения о преступлении, на основании поручения следователя Следственного комитета в порядке статьи 144 УПК РФ. The article deals with problematic issues associated with the use of the results of an operational experiment as evidence. It is proposed to refuse to conduct an operational experiment on the initiative of operational units and allow it to be conducted exclusively within the framework of considering a report on a crime, on the basis of an order from an investigator of the Investigative Committee in accordance with Article 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals BUKTI ELEKTRONIK SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI YANG SAH DALAM HUKUM ACARA PIDANA / ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE AS AN ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL LAW

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 463
Author(s):  
NFN Ramiyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Independent Evidence ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Functional Equivalent ◽  
Admissible Evidence

KUHAP sebagai hukum acara pidana yang bersifat umum tidak mengakui bukti elektronik sebagai salah satu jenis alat bukti yang sah. Di dalam praktik, bukti elektronik juga digunakan sebagai alat bukti yang sah untuk membuktikan tindak pidana yang terjadi di pengadilan. Dari hasil pembahasan dapat disimpulkan, bahwa bukti elektronik dalam hukum acara pidana berstatus sebagai alat bukti yang berdiri sendiri dan alat bukti yang tidak berdiri sendiri (pengganti bukti surat apabila memenuhi prinsip/dasar dalam functional equivalent approach dan perluasan bukti petunjuk) sebagaimana dicantumkan dalam beberapa undang-undang khusus dan instrumen hukum yang dikeluarkan oleh Mahkamah Agung. Walaupun bukti elektronik tidak diatur dalam KUHAP sebagai lex generalis, namun untuk tercapainya kebenaran materiil dapat juga digunakan sebagai alat bukti yang sah untuk pembuktian seluruh jenis tindak pidana di pengadilan. Hal itu didasarkan pada pengakuan dalam praktik peradilan pidana, beberapa undang-undang khusus, dan instrumen yang dikeluarkan oleh Mahkamah Agung.The Criminal Procedure Code as a general criminal procedure does not recognize electronic evidence as one of the admissible types of evidence. In practice, electronic evidence is also used as an admissible evidence to prove the criminal offenses in court. From the results of the discussion it can be concluded that electronic evidence in criminal procedure law is a dependent evidence and an independent evidence (substitution of letter proof if it meets the principle of functional equivalent approach and expansion of evidence) as specified in several special laws and instruments issued by the Supreme Court. The electronic evidence is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code as a lex generalis, however, to achieve material truth it can also be used as a valid evidence for the provision of all types of criminal offenses in court. It is based on recognition in the practice of criminal justice, some special laws, and instruments issued by the Supreme Court.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document