scholarly journals PROBLEMATIKA PENINJAUAN KEMBALI DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DAN PASCA SEMA RI No. 7 TAHUN 2014 (Suatu Analisa Yuridis Dan Asas-Asas Dalam Hukum Peradilan Pidana)

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 106
Author(s):  
Seno Wibowo Gumbira

Abstrak Permasalahan upaya hukum luar biasa pada Peninjauan Kembali khususnya pada proses peradilan pidana di Indonesia Pasca Putusan judicial review Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 34/PPU-XI/2013 dan SEMA RI No 7 Tahun 2014 yang dikeluarkan oleh Mahkamah Agung RI sama-sama memiliki permasalahan yuridis dan bertentangan dengan asas-asas baik dalam lingkup sistem peradilan pidana dan asas ilmu perundang-undangan di Indonesia, asas tersebut meliputi asas ne bis in idem, asas peradilan cepat, sederhana dan biaya ringan, asas litis finiri oportet, dan sedangkan pada ilmu perundang-undangan asas lex superior derogate legi inferior. Dapat juga dikatakan bahwa judicial review Mahkamah Konstitusi berpotensi merusak pilar hukum karena jika menyatakan suatu ketentuan hukum hanya satu undang-undang saja, yang mana peraturan perundang-undangan yang 1 bertentangan dengan peraturan perundang-undang lainnya seperti contoh Putusan MK Nomor 34/PPU-XI/2013 pada Pasal 268 ayat 3 Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 dinyatakan tidak memiliki kekuatan hukum tetap tentang Peninjauan Kembali hanya dilakukan 1 kali saja, sedangkan pada Pasal 24 ayat 2 Undang-Undang No. 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman dengan Pasal 66 ayat 1 Undang-Undang No. 3 Tahun 2009 tentang Mahkamah Agung, kedua instrument hukum tersebut menyatakan bahwa pengajuan Peninjauan Kembali hanya dapat diajukan 1 kali. Solusi agar tidak menimbulkan problematika adalah bahwa  Mahkamah Agung tidak perlu menerbitkan SEMA RI No 7 Tahun 2014 tersebut, cukup menggunakan Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman dan Undang-Undang Mahkamah Agung yang menyatakan Peninjauan kembali hanya 1 kali, selain itu perlu optimalisasi pembuktian dalam proses peradilan pidana oleh semua pihak. Kata Kunci: judicial review, Peninjauan Kembali, Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Abstract Problems of extraordinary legal remedy on Reconsideration, especially in the criminal justice process in Indonesia following the Ruling of judicial review of the Constitutional Court Number 34 / PPU-XI / 2013 and SEMA Decree No. 7 of 2014 issued by the Supreme Court had the same problem  juridical in contradictory with the principles both within the criminal justice system and the principle of the science of law in Indonesia, those principles include the principle of ne bis in idem, the principle of justice which one quick, simple and low cost, the principle of litis finiri oportet, It is on the principle of lex superior derogate legi inferior. It can also be said that the judicial review of the Constitutional Court has the potential to undermine the pillars of legal systems as when stating a legal provision is only base on one law, in which is in fact the legislation is incontracdictory with other laws such as of Constitutional Court Decision No. 34 / PPU-XI / 2013 on Article 268 paragraph 3 of Law No. 8 of 1981 that have no binding legal force, meanwhile in Article 24 paragraph 2 of Law No. 48 Year 2009 regarding Judicial Power with Article 66 paragraph 1 of Law No. 3 of 2009 on the Supreme Court, both legal instrument states that the filing of a judicial review can only be submitted one time. A solution that does not cause the problems is that the Supreme Court did not need to issue SEMA Decree No. 7 of 2014 the court simple use the Law of Judicial Power and the Law of the Supreme Court which states Reconsideration should be only one time in addition to the necessary optimize evidence of proof in the criminal justice process by all Parties. Keywords: judicial review, Reconsideration, the Criminal Justice System

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdul Kholiq

Abstrak Penegakan hukum dengan menggunakan sistem peradilan pidana berarti mengimplementasikan bekerjanya dalam setiap tahapan peradilan pidana, yaitu tahapan penyidikan, penuntutan, peradilan dan pelaksanaan putusan. Permasalahan konseptual yang menyangkut struktur penegakan hukum pidana, bersumber dari sistem penegakan hukum yang dibangun berdasarkan desain konstitusional. Pasca amandemen ke III terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar 1945, yang kemudian juga diikuti terbitnya Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 Tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman sebagai peraturan pelaksana, terhadap koreksi pada Kekuasaan Kehakiman. Kekuasaan kehakiman dijalankan dan dipegang oleh badan peradilan, hal ini sesuai dalam teori maupun ketentuan dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Badan peradilan di Indonesia yang menjalankan kekuasaan kehakiman berdasarkan hasil amandemen Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 adalah Mahkamah Agung, Mahkamah Konstitusi dan pengadilan-pengadilan tingkat lebih rendah yang di bawah Mahkamah Agung. Ketentuan tersebut juga diatur secara eksplisit di dalam Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 Pasal 24 Ayat (2). Pengadilan selama ini dijadikan sebagai suatu simbolik bagi masyarakat untuk mencapai tujuan-tujuan hukum khususnya keadilan dari permasalahan atau sengketa-sengketa hukum yang harus diselesaikan. Supremasi hukum akan dapat berjalan secara maksimal tatkala komponen-komponen dalam penegakan hukum yang tersistem ke dalam bentuk sistem peradilan pidana yang integral. Dalam penegakan hukum yang juga berhubungan dengan kekuasaan kehakiman, maka peran yang utama yaitu hakim-hakim pengadilan. Kata Kunci: Penegakan Hukum, Kekuasaan Kehakiman, Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Abstract Law enforcement by using the criminal justice system means implementing its work at every stage of criminal justice, namely the stages of investigation, prosecution, trial and implementation of decisions. Conceptual issues concerning the structure of criminal law enforcement are derived from a law enforcement system that is built on constitutional design. After the third amendment to the Constitution of 1945, which was also followed by the issuance of Law Number 48 of 2009 on Concerning Judicial Power as the implementing regulation, against correction to Judicial Power. Judicial power is carried out and held by the judiciary, this is in accordance with the theory and provisions in the legislation. Judicial bodies in Indonesia that exercise judicial authority based on the amendments to the Constitution of 1945 are the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court and lower-level courts under the Supreme Court. These provisions are also explicitly regulated in the Constitution of 1945 in Article 24 Paragraph (2). The court has been used as a symbolic for the community to achieve legal objectives, especially justice from problems or legal disputes that must be resolved. The supremacy of law will be able to run maximally when the components in systemic law enforcement are in the form of an integral criminal justice system. In law enforcement which also relates to judicial power, the main role is court judges. Keyword: Law Enforcement, Judicial Power, Criminal Justice System.


Laws ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 31
Author(s):  
Rhiannon Davies ◽  
Lorana Bartels

This article focuses on gendered experiences of the criminal justice system, specifically the experiences of adult female victims of sexual offending and the communication difficulties they experience during the criminal justice process. Drawing on the findings from qualitative interviews about sentencing with six victims and 15 justice professionals in Australia, we compare the lived experiences of the victims with the perceptions of the justice professionals who work with them, revealing a significant gap between the information justice professionals believe they are providing and the information victims recall receiving. We then analyse the international literature to distil effective communication strategies, with the goal of improving victims’ experiences of the criminal justice system as a whole. Specifically, we recommend verbal communication skills training for justice professionals who work with victims of crime and the development of visual flowcharts to help victims better understand the criminal justice process. We also recommend that Australian victims’ rights regimes be reformed to place the responsibility for providing information about the criminal process on the relevant justice agencies, rather than requiring the victim to seek this information, and suggest piloting automated notification systems to help agencies fulfil their obligations to provide victims with such information.


2018 ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Spruin

It is known that the criminal justice process is most often perceived as a negative experience by victims, witnesses, as well as defendants. Whilst measures have been put into place across the globe to improve their experiences, there is still much more which needs to be done, especially as the process can involve secondary victimisation of those participating in it and prolonged trauma. The current opinion piece centres on the use of trained dogs to help the experiences of criminal justice system users during active cases. Whilst this practice is mostly used in North America, hints at bringing varying types of dogs into the criminal justice system are visible elsewhere, too. With the criminal justice users in mind, it is key to establish, from the offset, the positives of such service, but also be very aware of its limitations and challenges, in order for the service delivering what it aims without causing a disruption to the criminal justice process or its users. This piece provides a theoretical and practical analysis of topicssurrounding the use of specially trained dogs to support criminal justice system users with the view of highlighting our lack of knowledge on the topic and practical challenges of this service.


Author(s):  
Rocky Marbun

Myths in the modern era are things that are considered like truth. It arises through the process of hegemony and dialectical domination by the authority in history. So, myth is a phenomenon of common sense without criticism. The state's presence in the criminal justice process as a grand narrative identified with the interests of victims and society, in general, is common sense without criticism. This study aims to reveal whether the myth of modernity is a representation of victims in the Criminal Justice System. This study uses a normative juridical method based on secondary data with several models of approaches, including conceptual approaches, philosophical approaches, and critical approaches. The result of this research shows the phenomenon of objectification and reification of the people as victims in the Criminal Justice System in Indonesia. Mitos dalam era modern merupakan hal-hal yang diandaikan begitu saja sebagai suatu kebenaran. Hal tersebut tampil melalui proses hegemoni dan dominasi dalam dialektika otoritas dalam sejarah. Sehingga, mitos merupakan suatu fenomena common sense tanpa kritik. Kehadiran negara dalam proses peradilan pidana sebagai narasi tunggal (grand narrative) yang diidentikan dengan kepentingan korban dan masyarakat secara umum, merupakan common sense tanpa kritik. Penelitian ini ditujukan untuk membongkar apakah mitos modernitas tersebut merupakan representasi korban dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif yang berbasis kepada data sekunder dengan beberapa model pendekatan, antara lain pendekatan konseptual, pendekatan filsafat, dan pendekatan kritis. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan adanya fenomena objektivikasi dan reifikasi terhadap masyarakat sebagai korban dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia.  


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-302
Author(s):  
Wes Reber Porter

Our American criminal justice system is too often described as broken. It was not a clean break in a single, isolated location. Instead, our criminal justice system suffers from many, many little nicks, bumps, and bruises at the hands of its keepers. The evolution of sentencing enhancements within our criminal justice system represents the latest nagging, reoccurring injury. In the ultimate Trojan horse to criminal defendants, the Supreme Court sought to protect the individual rights of the accused with its recent decisions on sentencing enhancements. But at the hands of lawmakers, the judiciary, and prosecutors, criminal defendants suffer more. Our criminal justice system also suffers from practices related to sentencing enhancements and the resulting wave of wrongful convictions by guilty plea.


Media Iuris ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 265
Author(s):  
Zulyani Mahmud ◽  
Zahratul Idami ◽  
Suhaimi Suhaimi

This article discusses and describes the task of the Banda Aceh Special Development Institute (LPKA) in providing guidance and fulfilling the rights of children in lpka. Law No. 11 of 2012 on the child criminal justice system in Article 3 states that every child in the criminal justice process has the right to conduct recreational activities, but in fact the fulfillment of children’s recreational rights has not been carried out to the maximum while in LPKA. The research method used is empirical juridical research method. The results showed the granting of Recreational Rights has not been running optimally, from within the LPKA is done by giving a schedule of play to students on holidays, activities carried out are playing volleys and playing musical instruments, activities outside lpka is to be a guest at discussion events held by other parties. not clearly regulated how the granting of recreational rights, the granting of recreational rights is done only on the basis of the policy of the Head of LPKA. Inhibitory factors in the absence of a special budget for the granting of recreational rights.Keywords: Fullfillment; Right; Recreational; Child Prisioner.Artikel ini membahas dan menganilis tugas Lembaga Pembinaan Khusus Anak (LPKA) Banda Aceh dalam memberikan pembinaan dan mempenuhi hak-hak anak di dalam LPKA, Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang sistem peradilan pidana anak dalam Pasal 3 menyebutkan bahwa setiap anak dalam proses peradilan pidana berhak melakukan kegiatan rekreasional, Namun dalam faktanya pemenuhan hak rekreasional anak belumlah terlaksana dengan maksimal selama di LPKA. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian yuridis empiris. Hasil penelitian menunjukan pemberian Hak Rekreasional belum berjalan maksimal, dari dalam LPKA dilakukan dengan cara memberikan jadwal bermain kepada anak didik di hari libur, kegiatan yang dilakukan adalah bermain volley dan bermain alat musik, kegiatan di luar LPKA yaitu menjadi tamu pada acara-acara diskusi yang di selenggarkan pihak lain. tidak diatur secara jelas bagaimana pemberian hak rekreasional tersebut, pemberian hak rekreasional dilakukan hanya atas dasar kebijakan Kepala LPKA. Faktor Penghambat tidak adanya anggaran khusus untuk pemberian hak rekreasional.Kata Kunci: Pemenuhan; Hak; Rekreasional; Narapidana Anak.


2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 650
Author(s):  
Anton Hendrik Samudra

This article gives idea on how to redress online transaction fraud victim in criminal justice system. The method applied is by looking scholars’ studies, statutes, observation of victimization process and interviewing law enforcement and victim. In several occasions, investigators turned to blame the victim when they report the crime. For several unsolved cases, the victim asked to revoke their report. This caused by investigator’s view that victim recklessness and failure to think what is deservedly suppose is the main cause of the crime. Treatment and interest fulfillment of online transaction fraud victim in criminal justice system should be redressed, such as the accommodation of material loss recovery, and regarding the victim’s interest during criminal justice process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document