scholarly journals Implementation Of Restorative Justice Approach In Legal Protection Against Lightweight Crime By The Children

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 943
Author(s):  
Rizky Adiyanzah Wicaksono ◽  
Sri Kusriyah Kusriyah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
And Control

Children who were doing mischief that led to the crime, should be against the law to account for his actions. Currently, prevention and control delinquency that resulted in minor criminal offenses is done through the implementation of the juvenile justice system to a restorative justice approach. The concept of restorative justice becomes a very important consideration in resolving criminal cases committed by children. The Supreme Court has issued a Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 2 of 2012 on the Limitation Adjustment light crime and the amount of penalties in the Criminal Code, which essentially stipulates that the value limit losses in tipiring (Lightweight Crime) case is a maximum of 2.5 million, and against the threat case maximum criminal penalty of three months imprisonment or fine, as well as in the settlement tipiring must promote Restorative Justice. Child settlement, which is directed to resolving informally or out of court, with the involvement of all parties involved in the criminal act has occurred. Minor criminal offenses committed by children under the Act No. 11 of 2012 carried through the diversion mechanism by way of mediation or deliberation.Keywords: Restorative Justice; Lightweight Crime; Children.

scholarly journals Penegakan Hukum Pidana Terhadap Anak Yang Terjerat Perkara Pidana Melalui Diversi (Studi Di Polrestabes Medan)

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84
Author(s):  
Akalafikta Jaya ◽  
Triono Eddy ◽  
Alpi Sahari
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Convictions ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Law

In the past, the punishment of children was the same as the punishment of adults. This causes the psychological condition of children ranging from investigation, investigation and trial to be disturbed because it is often intimidated by law enforcement agencies. Under these conditions, Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Justice System was born. One of the reforms in the Child Criminal Justice System Law requires the settlement of a child criminal case by diversion. Based on the results of research that the conception of criminal offenses against children in conflict with the law in Indonesia is different from criminal convictions to adults. Children are given the lightest possible punishment and half of the criminal convictions of adult criminal offenses. That criminal liability for children who are ensnared in a criminal case according to the Law on the Criminal Justice System for Children is still carried out but with different legal sanctions from adults. Criminal imprisonment against children is an ultimumremedium effort, meaning that criminal imprisonment against children is the last legal remedy after there are no other legal remedies that benefit the child. That the concept of enforcement of criminal law against children caught in criminal cases through diversion is in fact not all have applied it. Some criminal cases involving children as the culprit, in court proceedings there are still judges who impose prison sentences on children who are dealing with the law.

PENALTIES PROVIDED FOR SERIOUS CRIMES IN THE CRIMINAL CODE OF UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Skok ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Police

The statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office on registered criminal offenses in the form of serious crimes for 2020 and 2021 were reviewed. Based on this, the number of serious crimes registered by the National Police of Ukraine during the reporting periods was determined. The provisions of the current Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine, the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No 7 of October 24, 2003 are analyzed, as well as some scientific positions of domestic scientists Knyzhenko O. O are taken into account. and Berezhnyuk V. M In addition, a review of the case law of the Supreme Court of Cassation on sentencing was studied. A thorough criminal-legal analysis of the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the part of punishments established for the category of serious crimes was carried out. Based on the analysis, it was determined which main and additional punishments are regulated in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the investigated category of crimes. The quantitative and qualitative indicator of sanctions for serious crimes has been determined, which include: imprisonment for a definite term; punishments alternative to imprisonment; additional penalties. Legislative and doctrinal provisions on punishments in the form of imprisonment for a definite term, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest are considered. The judicial practice of Ukraine in the part of certain issues related to the execution of a penalty in the form of a fine and the replacement of a penalty in the form of a fine with a penalty in the form of correctional labor is analyzed. It is established that the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in the sanctions of the articles, provides for the application to a person who has committed a serious crime, punishment in the form of imprisonment, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest - as the main punishment. The range of additional punishments is defined, which determine: confiscation of property, deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities and a fine.

scholarly journals Disparitas Penuntutan Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan dalam Sistem Pemidanaan di Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-78
Author(s):  
Benny Leonard Saragih ◽  
Ediwarman Ediwarman ◽  
Muaz Zul
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Internal Factors ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Substantive Law

Difference in punishment or sentencing disparity is basically a natural thing because it can be said almost no case that is really the same. Disparity becomes a problem when the range of the sentence imposed differences between similar cases so large, giving rise to injustice and can give rise to suspicions in the community. Disparities in the Criminal (disparity of sentencing) is not the same as the application of criminal offenses against the same (same offense) or the criminal acts that are dangerous to be compared (offenses of comparable seriousness) without clear justification. Based on Law No. 16 of 2004 which replaced Law No. 5 of 1991 About the Prosecutor of the Republic of Indonesia is an institution in the field of prosecution of the main authority of the public prosecutor act prosecution about what is meant by the prosecution as well as the reference to the provisions of Article 1 point 7 and Article 137 Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Law of Criminal Procedure Code (Criminal Code). Research Methods in writing this thesis carried out by the method of normative law, namely analyzing and searching for answers to the problems raised by the substantive law / legal norms contained in the rules of law, the Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA), the Supreme Court Circular, and etc. Factors that cause the disparity criminal offense namely Legislation Provisions factors, internal factors and external factors.

scholarly journals Problems of proving guilt in criminal cases in connection with tax evasion

2019 ◽  
pp. 170-176
Author(s):  
V. V. Dubrovin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The establishment of an intentional form of guilt and its specific type is mandatory for the implementation of the provisions of Art. 8 of the Criminal Code. In criminal proceedings in connection with tax evasion, a direct intent should be established in the act of the accused, otherwise the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 28, 2006 No. 64 “On the practice of criminal law on liability for tax offenses”. One of the proofs of direct intent in the act of the accused may be the decision of the tax authority to prosecute for the tax offense, made according to the results of tax control measures (in-house or on-site tax audits). In the event that it establishes an imprudent form of the taxpayer’s guilt in committing a tax offense, in proving the guilt of the accused in the course of criminal proceedings there may be an intractable contradiction.

scholarly journals ANALISA PEMBELIAN BARANG UNDERPRICED SEBAGI BENTUK KESALAHAN DELIK PENADAHAN: TINJAUAN YURIDIS YURISPRUDENSI MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 2/YUR/PID/2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 106
Author(s):  
Vina Putri Salim ◽  
Tsamara Probo Ningrum ◽  
Risma Cahya Yudita Pratama ◽  
Nur Fadilah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
General Public ◽  
Market Price ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Movable Object ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Precautionary Measures

The purpose of this article is to find out the application of Supreme Court Jurisprudence Number 2 / Yur / Pid / 2018 which provides legal rules related to underpriced purchases as the fulfillment of the element "should be suspected that it was obtained from criminal offenses" in the offense. This research is legal research with a statutory approach and conceptual approach. The research results obtained are the application of the new legal rules in the Supreme Court Jurisprudence Number 2 / Yur / Pid / 2018 to the element of negligence in the offense delimitation in Article 480 of the Criminal Code. are required by law and do not exercise caution as required by law which is an element of negligence. In the element of not making guesses as required by law, it is related to the inner attitude of society in general, wherein movable objects the authorities are considered as the owner and society, in general, cannot know the market price of each movable object. This is different from immovable objects, where the authorities are not always the owners, where ownership is generally based on certificates so that the general public can know the price of the immovable object. In its development, registered and unregistered objects were born, whereas, in registered objects, the general public could find out the price of these registered objects, because ownership of these registered objects could be known publicly. About not taking the precautions required by law, which must be seen whether there is a behavior of the defendant to take preventive measures related to the origin of the goods, where when the buyer/seller has taken precautionary measures, it can be said that the buyer/seller has done the duty to be careful so that it cannot be said that negligence has occurred.

scholarly journals O przedmiocie ochrony prawnej przestępstwa paserstwa umyślnego

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 39-72
Author(s):  
Marta Zwierz
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Legal Arguments

This paper addresses the problem of classifying the criminal offence of handling stolen goods under the Polish Criminal Code of 1997. Referring to two separate and contradictory views about the crime, the study looks at both of them and attempts to define the subject of legal protection of that criminal offence in the Polish legal system. To this end, the paper also discusses a judgment of 26 June 2014 of the Polish Supreme Court (I KZP 8/14), in which the Supreme Court could not conclusively resolve the issue, creating even more doubts. The author questions the position of the Polish Supreme Court, arguing that it is not supported by either logical or legal arguments which would stem from the long-standing legal tradition. The author further argues that all problems arising from the determination of the good legally protected by the criminal offence as defined in Article 291(1) of the Polish Criminal Code result from the erroneous classification of criminal offences by the Polish lawmaker.

scholarly journals FORMATION OF THE UKRAINIAN LEGAL DOCTRINE CONCERNING QUALIFICATION OF THE CRIMINAL OFFENSES COMMITTED BY THE ORGANIZED CRIMINAL GROUPS IN CONTEXT OF AMENDING CHANGES TO LEGISLATION ON CRIMINAL LAW

2021 ◽  
pp. 112-116
Author(s):  
D. Ptaschenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Groups

The Article 1 of the Constitution of Ukraine regulates: Ukraine is a sovereign and independent, democratic, social, legal state. One of the destabilizing factors in building the rule of law is the commission of criminal offenses by organized criminal groups. Due to the changes in the criminal legislation during the last two years, the criminal law norms have undergone significant changes, which directly or indirectly affect the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups. Given the changes in criminal law, the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups requires uniform systemic approaches, primarily at the level of judicial law enforcement practice. The formation of the Ukrainian legal doctrine on the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups is one of the significant auxiliary guidelines in the formation of such law enforcement practice. To achieve this goal and the defined objectives, the following methods were applied in the study: logical and normative – for the analysis of criminal law on the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups; system analysis – when considering judicial law enforcement practice (first of all, the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Ukraine) of the qualification of criminal offenses committed by organized criminal groups. The legislation strengthens criminal liability for criminal offenses by organized criminal groups, in particular, as evidenced by the amendments to the Criminal Code under the Law of Ukraine "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Liability for Crimes Committed by the Criminal Community" dated by the 4th of June 2020. Before the formation of new approaches to the doctrine of criminal law and law enforcement judicial practice on the qualification of criminal offenses (crimes), a specific part of which is provided by h.ch. 1-5 art. 255 of the Criminal Code, the indirect reference is the provision of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of December 23, 2005 №12 "On the practice of consideration by courts of criminal cases on crimes committed by stable criminal groups." Keywords: criminal offenses, criminal community, criminal organization, organized group, creation of a criminal community, leadership of a criminal community, organized criminal groups.

Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the Practice of the Courts’ Application of Legislation on Liability for Tax Crimes”: An Analysis of the Main Novels

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Igor O. Tkachev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article provides a critical analysis of a number of provisions of the Resolution No. 48 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2019, “On the practice of the courts’ application of legislation on liability for tax crimes”. The author notes that the current version of the decree allows considering tax evasion as a formal crime. Thus, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation laid down the preconditions for classifying tax evasion as a continuing crime, which would significantly reduce the number of criminal cases terminated due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal liability. The author also draws attention to the refusal of the Supreme Court to define the category “concealment of funds or other property” for the purposes of applying Art. 199.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It is noted that such a refusal may lead to a broader interpretation by the courts of this criminal law norm.

scholarly journals PEMIDANAAN TERHADAP PERBUATAN MENGHILANGKAN MAYAT YANG DILAKUKAN ANAK (STUDI TERHADAP PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO. 774K / PID.SUS / 2015)

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 636
Author(s):  
Heppi Florensia ◽  
Mety Rahmawati
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Supreme Court Ruling ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Criminalization of the offender especially in the perpetrators of children under age is as a sanction that tells implied to someone who performs acts meet certain conditions. Often in prosecuting a criminal case the Public Prosecutor is wrong in deciding what articles should be imposed on the perpetrator. As one case of Supreme Court verdict No.774K/PID.SUS/2015 with 16-year-old defendant Dicky Pranata prosecuted by the Prosecutor with Article 340 of the Penal Code juncto Article 56 of the Criminal Code is a criminal act of premeditated murder, in which the elements of Article 340 of the Criminal Code are not fulfilled the defendant's self but the existence of other crimes Article 181 of the Criminal Code of disappearance committed by the defendant. The defendant was sentenced to 10 years in prison at the District Court, while the defendant was released from the sentence of the Court of Appeal and Cassation. The problem in this research is whether the act of the perpetrator fulfills the elements in Article 340 juncto Article 56 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code juncto Article 1 paragraph (3) SPPA Act and Article 181 of the Criminal Code? How to base criminal offenses in the Supreme Court ruling case No.774K/PID.SUS/2015? The researcher examines the problem with normative juridical method. Based on the analysis result that the defendant is not proven to commit element of crime Article 340 KUHP, but the existence of criminal act Article 181 of Criminal Code which has been done by defendant.

scholarly journals Pembunuhan Anak oleh Ibu Kandung yang di Bawah Umur

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 188-192
Author(s):  
Putu Ayu Devi Laxsmi ◽  
I Ketut Sukadana ◽  
I Nyoman Sujana
Keyword(s):  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Criminal Sanction ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Legal Concepts ◽  
Case Number

A phenomenon of the occurrence of criminal acts committed by children with various and various cases and characteristics that have not been able to account for their actions legally, which in Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Justice System, is intended to provide protection and protection for children in to welcome his long-term future, but besides children as victims of criminal acts, it is possible for children to be criminals. Therefore, how is the judge's judgment in imposing a criminal sentence on a child who commits a criminal act of murder in Decision Number: 18/Pid.Sus.Anak/2016/PN. Dps? And what is the criminal sanction imposed by the judge on the perpetrator of the crime of murder the Number: 18 /Pid.Sus.Anak/2016/PN. Dps. In this study the author uses the Normative research method through his study of literature studies, while the problem approach in this study uses a legislative approach that analyzes legislation and uses a conceptual approach that analyzes problems with legal concepts from books and literature and approaches the case. The results of this study are Judges in considering criminal cases Number: 18/Pid.Sus.Anak /2016/PN. DPS, which is carried out by children because the perpetrators of criminal offenses are still underage, and have never committed an unlawful act before and promised not to repeat other violations of law. And Based on the case of killing a child as referred to in case Number: 18/Pid.Sus.Anak/2016 /PN. DPS, the coercion of criminal sanctions is not applied, but the implementation of Diversion lead on number 11 of 2012 concerning juvenile justyce sistem and in paragraph (2) letters a and b must be sought for Diversion, with terms and conditions Parents are willing to maintain, guide and supervise their children so that they will not repeat their actions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document