scholarly journals KESAKSIAN PENYIDIK DALAM PEMBUKTIAN PERKARA PIDANA (STUDI KASUS : PUTUSAN NO. 1273/PID.B/2013/PN.JKT.SEL)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 449
Author(s):  
Ariadi Hanta Wijaya ◽  
Firman Wijaya

In the context of criminal law, proof is the core of criminal proceedings because what is sought in criminal law is material truth. Basically, this aspect of proof has actually begun at the stage of criminal investigation. The act of investigation and investigation will be carried out immediately in the event of a criminal offense, the existence of a criminal offense can be known by the officer, with reports, complaints, caught red-handed, or known directly by the officer. So, before an act of investigation is carried out, an investigation is carried out by an investigating official, with the intention and purpose of finding and finding an event that is investigated a criminal event or not, if the investigation results as a criminal event, an investigation can be carried out. or certain civil servants who are authorized to carry out investigations, before the investigator conducts investigations such as making arrests, calling, searching, detaining, confiscating, the investigator must notify the public prosecutor so that the prosecutor can follow his investigation from the beginning, and if deemed necessary to give instructions in order to perfect the investigation. In the murder case with the defendant Andro and Benges, the witnesses presented by the Public Prosecutors in the trial were almost all investigators who examined this case. If only an investigator is present in proving someone guilty or not in a criminal case, of course the investigator will justify what he has done so that his statement becomes not objective.

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 461
Author(s):  
Hidayat Abdulah

In the implementation of the criminal case handling a lot of things that can be done to perfect evidence is the failure by one of them is doing a separate filing (splitsing). In Article 142 Criminal Procedure Code stipulates that the public prosecutor has the authority to separate docket (splitsing) against each defendant if found lacking evidence and testimony, as well as other matters that are not included in the provisions of Article 141 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Separation of the case must be based on solely the purpose of examination. That's what makes the public prosecutor has the authority to determine the case file should be separated (splitsing) or not. The purpose for doing the separation of the case file (splitsing) is to facilitate the enforcement of the prosecutor when the court process, to strengthen the evidence for lack of evidence when the process of verification, then a criminal offense committed by the offender more than one and the same time one of these actors into the search list (DPO) which allow splitsing.Keywords: Separate Filing; The Criminal Case.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (3 ENGLISH ONLINE VERSION) ◽  
pp. 101-127
Author(s):  
Piotr Krzysztof Sowiński

The article presents issues concerning the legal qualification of a criminal act by the prosecutor, including the public prosecutor, the legal qualification of the fact, and the significance of this procedural act for the defendant’s ability to defend himself effectively. The relationship between the limits of accusation and the limits of examination of a criminal case and the scope of defence were presented. The author discusses the indication of changes in the legal qualification to the suspect or defendant and the court’s authorisation in this respect, with particular emphasis on the regulation provided by Article 399 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Doubts about the application of Article 80 of the Code are discussed as well as its influence on the use of the institution of obligatory defence.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-216
Author(s):  
Hurip Agustina ◽  
Dadang Suprijatna ◽  
Aal Lukmanul Hakim

Crime embezzlement car rentals are lately often devastating car rental owner. This is an issue where the meaning of a rule of law if the crime committed community can not be followed by the rule of law, such as crimes by way of evasion is one of the types of crimes against human wealth which is stated in Article 372 of the Criminal Code, which is a crime that does not exist inexhaustible, both from the bottom layer to the top layer of society can also be committing a criminal act embezzlement is a crime that originated from the existence of a trust in others, and that trust is lost because of the lack of an honesty. It is stated that the crime of embezzlement have a problem that is closely linked to attitudes, moral, mental, honesty and trust humans as individuals. The purpose of this study are as follows: 1) To determine and analyze the occurrence of the crime of embezzlement car rental. 2) To know and analyze the application of Article 372 of the Criminal Code the crime of embezzlement in the rental car. 3) To know and analyze the efforts of the police in preventing crime of embezzlement car lease. This study uses normative juridical approach that is used to make the description clear, systematic, transparent and precise about the facts / specific nature of the area and population which is then analyzed to obtain the desired facts. Criminal offense embezzlement rental car can be imprisoned if they meet the overall elements of the offenses charged by the public prosecutor and the offender accountable for his actions. If the offender does not meet one of the elements of which the accused, then it can not be convicted. The elements of criminal responsibility are: 1) committing illegal or criminal acts; 2) for the criminal should be able to be responsible; 3) to have a fault; 4) absence of an excuse. The conclusion from this study is the adoption of Article 372 of the Criminal Code in criminal offenses of embezzlement car rental where the incidence of criminal acts committed tenants for the rented goods belonging to the owner of the rental rights because of misuse or abuse of trust in which the crime of embezzlement are set in the provisions of Article 372 of the Criminal Code.


2019 ◽  
Vol 06 (02) ◽  
pp. 297-319
Author(s):  
Rudi Sudirdja

In Indonesia, the provision of in absentia in the Money Laundering Crime Law raises problems if the crime act is originally conventional crime act. Conventional crime act should be handled based on the provisions of the Indonesian Criminal Law Procedures Code. On the one hand, the Money Laundering Crime Law regulates the provisions of the court in absentia and, on the other hand, the Indonesian Criminal Law Procedures Code does not recognize trial in absentia. This study covers the issue. To be precise, it reveals the possibility of a conventional crime act that is charged with the Money Laundering Crime Law to be tried in absentia based on the principle of formal legality. In addition, it discusses the strategy of prosecution of money laundering crime act in trial in absentia for cases that are originally conventional crime act based on the principle of due process of law. This study used analytical description research specifications and the normative juridical method. The data was collected through a document study. In accordance with the approaches, the data were analyzed in qualitative-juridical manners. This study concludes several points. The first, based on the principle of legality of formal law, the implementation of trial in absentia against general criminal acts cannot be carried out. The second, based on the principle of due process of law, the prosecution strategy in trial in absentia fur such cases are that (1) the prosecution of money laundering crime and original crime must be done separately; (2) the public prosecutor must delay the transfer of original criminal acts to the court until the accused is found and presented; (3) the indictment must be prepared in a single form; (4) the indictment must draw legal facts about the original crime; and (5) the public prosecutor can prove the legal facts about the original crime in the element of ‘assets resulting from the crime’ in the money laundering offense.


2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442110283
Author(s):  
Ashlee Beazley ◽  
Fien Gilleir ◽  
Michele Panzavolta ◽  
Joëlle Rozie ◽  
Miet Vanderhallen

This article is about the right to remain silent within Belgium. Although the right has always been considered applicable, both the courts and parliament have historically demonstrated a disinclination to define or engage with this. The right to silence is now formally recognised in the Belgian Code of Criminal Procedure, albeit with the classic distinction between those who are not (yet) accused of a crime and those who are formal suspects: while all enjoy the right not to incriminate themselves, only formal suspects in Belgium enjoy the explicit right to remain silent. Accordingly, whilst no one may be obliged to assist with their own conviction or be forced to co-operate with the authorities, it remains unclear how far the right not to cooperate effectively stretches. The case law seems to be moving, albeit slowly, in the direction of confining this right within narrower borders, particularly by excluding its applicability with regard to the unlocking and decryption of digital devices. This is not, however, the only idiosyncrasy concerning the right to silence in Belgium. Among those also addressed in this article are: the lack of caution on the right to remain silent given to arrested persons immediately following their deprivation of liberty (an absence striking for its apparent breach of Directive 2012/13/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings); the possible inducement to breach the right to silence via the discretionary powers of the public prosecutor to offer a reduction or mitigation in sentence; the obscurity surrounding the definition of ‘interrogation’ and the consequences of this on both the caution and the obtaining of statements; and the extent to which judges can draw adverse inferences from the right to silence. The question remains: is the right to silence currently protected enough?


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (XXI) ◽  
pp. 97-114
Author(s):  
Michał Sędziński

The aim of this article is to comprehensively analyse the legal position of the public prosecutor in administrative proceedings and administrative court proceedings. This subject is interesting because the public prosecutor is usually associated with criminal proceedings and his capacity as the public accuser. However, the public prosecutor plays a special role in administrative proceedings, i.e. participates in them as an entity with the rights of a party, even though he has no legal interest in it. It is also worth noting that the powers of the public prosecutor are clearly more extensive than those of other entities with the rights of a party. This article is an attempt to determine the role of the public prosecutor in administrative proceedings and decide whether he is the accuser or rather the representative of the public interest. The position of the public prosecutor in proceedings before administrative courts is special as well. This issue needs to be discussed in detail, which was taken into account in the second part of the article. The position of the public prosecutor as the advocate of the rule of law is regulated by the Act on the Public Prosecutor’s Office. The analysis of these provisions in conjunction with Chapter 4 of the Code of Administrative Procedure leads to a conclusion that the public prosecutor who acts in administrative proceedings as an entity with the rights of a party has powers vested in him alone and watches over such proceedings, thereby fulfilling the duties of an advocate of the rule of law. To fully show the special position of the public prosecutor, it is necessary to enumerate his powers in administrative proceedings and compare them with the competences of “ordinary” entities with the rights of a party.


1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 223-244
Author(s):  
Bert Swart

According to Article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal in the determination of any criminal charge against him. The essence of both provisions could be rephrased by saying that criminal sanctions may only be imposed on a person by an independent and impartial tribunal and only if that person has been able to defend himself against a charge during a hearing that satisfies all requirements of a fair trial.Realities, of course, are rather different. In almost all national systems of justice there is an increasing tendency to develop procedures that allow for imposing sanctions without the necessity of a criminal trial. Their main purpose is usually to relieve the system of a burden of cases with which it cannot really cope. Basically, there are two strategies to reduce the workload of courts and public prosecutors. The first is to invite the suspect to waive his right to trial in exchange for certain favours. This usually occurs in the form of an agreement between the public prosecutor and the suspect, while quite often the cooperation of the court that would have tried the case is also required. The second solution is to grant sanctioning powers to administrative bodies and to allow individual persons an appeal against their decisions to an independent and impartial tribunal.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (XIX) ◽  
pp. 173-183
Author(s):  
Jan Kil

The subject of the article is the analysis of the admissibility of a partial withdrawal of a principalaction by the prosecutor in the current model of Polish criminal proceedings. The study defines the main procedural rules regarding the issue in question, namely the principle of accusatorial procedure and adversary trial system. In the study, the disposition of Article 14 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is being interpreted with the use of linguistic, teleological and functional directives of interpretation. The study also presents the arguments justifying the acceptance of the view of the admissibility of partial withdrawal of the complaint by the public prosecutor. The study presents the procedural implications of the aforementioned standpoint. In the study the possibility of partial withdrawal of the principal action on the basis of pending supplementary or private prosecution proceedings was also analyzed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 237
Author(s):  
Sumaryono Sumaryono ◽  
Sri Kusriyah Kusriyah

Fraudulent criminal acts that have been regulated in the Criminal Code (KUHP) with various modes, one of which is fraud by shamans with a multiplied money mode has made law enforcers increasingly have to rack their brains to be able to prove it. This study aims to examine and analyze law enforcement by the judge in decision No.61 / Pid.B / 2019 / PN.Blora with consideration of the criminal elements. The research method used is a sociological juridical approach. The specifications of the study were conducted using descriptive analytical methods. The data used for this study are primary and secondary data. The data consists of primary data and secondary data using field research methods, interviews, and literature studies. Based on the research it was concluded that the case ruling number 61 / Pid.B / 2019 / PN Bla with a fraud case with shamanism practices in the mode of duplicating the judge's money considering that the Defendants have been indicted by the Public Prosecutor with alternative indictments, so the Panel of Judges paid attention to the facts The aforementioned law decides on the first alternative indictment as regulated in Article 378 of the Criminal Code Jo Article 55 paragraph (1) of the 1st Criminal Code by considering the elements of that article.Keywords: Criminal Law Enforcement; Fraud; Multiple Money.


Yuridika ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Bastianto Nugroho

The trial of a criminal case is to find out whether a criminal offense has occurred in an event, therefore in the most important criminal proceedings the proceedings are proved. Evidence is a problem that plays a role in the examination process in court because with this proof is determined the fate of a defendant. The legal function in the State of Indonesia is to regulate the order of society in the life of the nation and the state, whereas the violation of the law itself is an event that must exist in every society and is impossible to be eliminated absolutely, because violation of law is an integral part of development More complex. One of the provisions governing how the law enforcement officers carry out the task in the field of repressive is the criminal procedure law which has the purpose of searching and approaching material truth, the complete truth of a criminal case by applying the provisions of criminal procedure law honestly darn precisely with The purpose of finding out who the perpetrator can be charged with is a violation of the law. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document