scholarly journals Implementation of Compensation Claim's Mechanism through Pretrial for Error in Persona in the Criminal Justice System

Ius Poenale ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-148
Author(s):  
Feryando Feryando

An error in persona in the implementation of the criminal justice system is a type of destructive action by law enforcement officers that can cause harm to someone. The use of authority by investigators to arrest and detain and detention and prosecution by public prosecutors is a concrete form of persona error. This study focused on the mechanism of a compensation claim through pre-trial due to a persona error in implementing the criminal justice system and an impediment to the implementation of the pre-trial judge's decision on the granting of the compensation claim. The method used is normative and empirical juridical research. The results showed that the mechanism of a claim for compensation through pre-trial due to an error in person in implementing the criminal justice system was carried out fundamentally at the formulation stage. These formulations outlined in the Code Of Criminal Procedure (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana/ KUHAP) and Government Regulation Concerning Implementation of The Book of Criminal Procedure Law as a basis for the implementation of pre-trial and the application stage. The statutory factors of Decree of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 983 / KMK.01 / 1983 (Keputusan Menteri Keuangan RI Nomor 983/KMK.01/1983) are an impediment in implementing the pre-trial judge's determination of the compensation claim because the regulation governs administrative procedures that are lengthy and involve government agencies.

Teisė ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 106 ◽  
pp. 130-143
Author(s):  
Simona Garbatavičiūtė

This Article aims to overview procedural grounds in the Lithuanian criminal justice system that relate to the concepts of simplified and negotiated justice, in particular to the concept of plea bargaining. Specifically, the research seeks to examine the procedures of simplified examination of evidence in court, accelerated proceedings and the procedure of penal order as foreseen in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter referred to as the CCP). This research aims to highlight similarities between the aforementioned procedures and the concept of plea bargaining.


2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 07001
Author(s):  
Rocky Marbun ◽  
Abdul Hakim ◽  
M. Adystia Sunggara

Since 1981, marked by the enactment of law number 8 of 1981 on criminal procedure law, it has become a consensus to abandon the Cartesian paradigm embodied in the inquisitoire principle. The inquisitoire principle sees any person drawn into a criminal justice struggle as an object. The Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) through the philosophical foundation of Pancasila, commands to adopt the accusatoire principle, in honor of the withdrawn party as a person entirely. However, the KUHAP/CPC formers forget the institutional legal culture of the thrown (gowerfen-sein) criminal justice system in the myth of modernity that is the objectification of human being. So that the law enforcement officers (investigators, public prosecutors, judges) always ignore Pancasila as the philosophical foundation of thought in carrying out the law.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 136-145
Author(s):  
Djulieta Vasiloi

Reviewing the publication Magherescu, Delia: Criminal Procedure Law: General Part: Special Part, a significant legal education instrument addressed to those who might be interested in deepening their knowledge in the field of the criminal justice system of Romania.


Author(s):  
Simon Butt

This article discusses flaws of Indonesia’s criminal procedural laws through an analysis of the Jessica Wongso case. After a televised trial in 2016, Wongso was convicted of murdering her friend Salihin, by putting cyanide in her coffee at a Jakarta café, and sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment. The conviction was upheld on appeal in late 2018. The police obtained very limited evidence against Wongso, leaving prosecutors unable to determine the cause of Salihin’s death, much less to prove convincingly that Wongso was the perpetrator. By contrast, the defense mustered significant exculpatory evidence. But the judges, at first instance and on appeal, took an uncritical view of the prosecution evidence and ignored the defense case. Throughout the investigation and trial, Wongso was not accorded the presumption of innocence, partly because of Indonesia’s flawed or absent formal legal infrastructure for arrests, detentions, searches, and disclosure of prosecution evidence to the defense. It is also because highly prejudicial press coverage before and during trials is not prohibited and because judges lack professionalism. All this suggests a strong need for reform—not only to Indonesia’s criminal procedure law, but also to the way it is applied in practice.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 201
Author(s):  
Ellen Yolanda Sinaga

Implementation of diversion by a public prosecutor children, nowadays the mechanism is based on Law of The Republic of Indonesia Number 11 Year 2012 regarding the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. Further provisions concerning the guidelines for the implementation of diversion, ordinances, and coordinate the implementation of diversion stipulated on Indonesian Republic Government Regulation Number 65 in 2015 on the guidelines for the implementation of diversion and treatment of children who are aged 12 years. But the problem until now has not drawn up internal rules to the public prosecutor in the form attorney General of The Republic of Indonesia regulation as the basic for the implementation of the mechanism reffered versioned on Indonesian Republic Government Regulation Number 65 in 2015 on the guidelines for the implementation of diversion and treatment of children who are aged 12 years. The importance of internal rules as the basic for the public prosecutor in the executing diversion, as the uniformity of implementation of the diversion by a public prosecutor children across Indonesia, in order to avoid differences in the implementation mechanisms of diversion, which is still based instruction each child’s direct leadership prosecutor, who do diversion. Further in praction, there are differences in the implementation mechanisms of diversion by a children public prosecutor in Indonesia which resulted in the implementation of the goal of diversion has not been maximally as aspired is to keep children who are dealing with the law, from the adverse effects of the criminal justice system.  Keywords : diversion, juvenile criminal justice system, public prosecutor children


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-77
Author(s):  
I Made Wisnu Wijaya Kusuma ◽  
I Made Sepud ◽  
Ni Made Sukaryati Karma

Criminal justice system and Indonesian criminal procedural law adhere to presumption of innocence.So, a person must protect his human rights. KUHAP formed a new institution, namely pretrial. Based on this research authors raise formulation problems: 1. How pretrial regulation criminal justice system Indonesia, 2. How validity  pretrial that has not been decided if the subject matter case has been tried. Type research used normative. approach method used statutory approach, shortening analysis legal concepts. pre-trial authority according to Article 77 Criminal Procedure Code examines whether or not coercive measures are arrest and detention well examine whether or not termination investigation or prosecution, compensation and rehabilitation legal or not. Judge Sarpin stated that Sprindik, which became the basis for Budi Gunawan's investigation, was invalid. pretrial regulations are regulated Law No. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure Law in article 77 Criminal Procedure Code, namely pretrial, which   authority  district court examine and decide, Constitutional Court Number 21/PUU -XII/2014, authority pre-trial institution also includes whether or not determination suspects valid, searches and confiscation. Validity investigations carried out by KPK regarding   determination suspect Budi Gunawan was invalid therefore determination had no binding legal force. The Subject matter  pretrial case being tried declared null and void.


1998 ◽  
Vol 153 ◽  
pp. 31-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. L. Fu

Criminal procedure in China had been governed by the 1979 Criminal Procedure Law (CPL 1979). This was amended in 1996 (the Amendment). In many aspects, the Amendment introduces important changes to the previous procedures and significantly redistributes the existing division of powers within the criminal justice system. It restricts police power and the prosecution's discretion. It enhances the position of the court and differentiates the role of judges. It also offers more protection for the rights of the accused and enhances the position of defence lawyers in the criminal process in substantive and procedural aspects. Consequently criminal lawyers are expected to play a more active and meaningful role in criminal defence.


Author(s):  
M. Reza Sudarji Famaldika ◽  
Rodliyah Rodliyah ◽  
M. Natsir

The purpose of this research is to know, understand, and analyze the calling of PPAT according to criminal justice system related to protection aspect and form of legal responsibility.This research method uses normative law research type. Normative legal research is a legal research that lays law as a norm system building. The norm system is about principles, norms, and rules, rules of law, court decisions, agreements and doctrines (teachings). Using the approach method: Statutory Approach, Case Approach, and Conceptual Approach. Normative procedure research results in the calling of PPAT as a witness or suspect are imposed by Article 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code while the seizure of the original deed of PPAT (minuta) and warkah can only be done with the special permission of the Chairman of the local District Court under the provisions of Article 43 of the Book Invite Criminal Procedure Law. PPAT as a Public Officer in carrying out his / her position should have special legal protection to keep the honor and dignity of his / her position including when giving testimony and information in examination and trial. Notary and PPAT positions have similarity in carrying out its duty of making an authentic deed based on the wishes of the parties. The calling of a notary in the criminal justice system has a provision which must be followed as the provisions of Article 66 Paragraph (1) of the Law on Notary Call for the interest of the criminal proceeding process shall obtain the approval of the Notary Public Council while the invitation to the PPAT office shall have the legal provisions in general not having legal protection set specifically.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Mujuzi

South African law provides for circumstances in which victims of crime may participate in the criminal justice system at the investigation, prosecution (trial), sentencing and parole stages. In South Africa, a prison inmate has no right to parole although the courts have held that they have a right to be considered for parole. In some cases, the victims of crime have a right to make submissions to the Parole Board about whether the offender should be released on parole. Section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides for the right of victims of crime to participate in parole proceedings. The purpose of this article is to discuss section 299A and illustrate ways in which victims of crime participate in the parole process. The author also recommends ways in which victims’ rights in section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act could be strengthened.


Temida ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alenka Selih

The paper presents the ways of introducing both material and procedural alternative measures into the criminal justice system of Slovenia from the beginning of 1990s, particularly into the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1995 (with the further amendments). That relates to both adult and juvenile offenders. Regarding implementation, the author emphasizes characteristics of the implementation of both groups of institutions; pays attention to the fact that procedural institutions are more important for prosecution of minor criminal offences; points out the importance of the personal factor that contributes to the implementation of new provisions; and gives an overview of the first experiment in the Slovenian judiciary related to that. The author gives an analysis of problems dealt with in the Slovenian doctrine and judicial practice in connection with alternative ways of proceeding; she points out, in particular, the imperfections of legal solutions; the unclear competences in implementation of alternative sanctions and problems resulting from such a situation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document