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 PELAKSANAAN URUSAN PEMERINTAH KONKUREN DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA TANAH ULAYAT DI KABUPATEN KUANTAN SINGINGI

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rido Rikardo
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Case Files ◽  
Victims Of Crime ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Sense Of Justice

ABSTRAKPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan memahami bagaimana Tugas dan Kewenangan Kejaksaan dalam Penerapan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung RI nomor: 02 tahun 2012 tentang penyesuaian batasan tindak pidana ringan dan jumlah denda dalam KUHP dalam kaitannya dengan perkara tindak pidana ringan Harta Kekayaan di dalam KUHP dalam proses Pra Penuntutan (Studi Kasus Perkara Pencurian di Kejaksaan Negeri Kampar) dan Apakah kendala dan hambatan yang dihadapi Jaksa Peneliti dalam Penerapan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung RI Nomor : 02 tahun 2012 tentang penyesuaian batasan tindak pidana ringan dan jumlah denda dalam KUHP dalam Tindak Pidana Ringan lingkup Harta Kekayaan. Penelitian ini dilakukan secara sosiologis yakni berdasarkan fakta fakta yang ada dilapangan. Hasil penelitian menemukan bahwa Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam melaksanakan tugasnya dibidang para penuntutan dalam menerima berkas perkara Penyidikan oleh Pihak Kepolisian harus dengan seksama melihat apakah suatu perkara masuk dalam kategori Tindak Pidana Ringan yang dimaksudkan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2 Tahun 2012 atau tidak dengan berbagai pertimbangan yang dapat dipahami oleh Penyidik Kepolisian tentu saja hal ini akan memberikan rasa keadilan baik bagi Tersangka maupun bagi korban tindak pidana dan masyarakat pada umumnya.Kata kunci: kewenangan; penyelesaian; dendaABSTRACTThis study aims to find out and understand how the Duties and Authority of the Prosecutor's Office in Applying the Republic of Indonesia Supreme Court Regulation number: 02 of 2012 concerning the adjustment of minor criminal offenses and the amount of fines in the Criminal Code in relation to cases of minor criminal offenses. (Case Study of Theft Case in the Kampar District Prosecutor's Office) and What are the obstacles and obstacles faced by the Research Prosecutor in Applying the Republic of Indonesia Supreme Court Regulation No. 02/2012 concerning the adjustment of minor criminal offenses and the amount of fines in the Criminal Code in Minor Crimes in the scope of Assets. this is done sociologically, based on facts in the field. The results of the study found that the Public Prosecutor in carrying out his duties in the field of prosecution in receiving case files Investigations by the Police must carefully see whether a case is included in the category of Minor Crimes as intended by Supreme Court Regulation Number 2 of 2012 or not with various considerations that can understood by Police Investigators, of course this will give a sense of justice both to the Suspect and to victims of crime and the community at large.Keywords: authority; settlement; fines

scholarly journals Ajaran Turut Serta Tindak Pidana Korupsi

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-52
Author(s):  
Harry Arfhan ◽  
Mohd. Din ◽  
Sulaiman Sulaiman
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Banda Aceh

Penyertaan pada dasarnya diatur dalam pasal 55 dan 56 KUHP yang berarti bahwa ada dua orang atau lebih yang melakukan suatu tindak pidana atau dengan perkataan ada dua orangatau lebih mengambil bahagian untuk mewujudkan suatu tindak pidana. Penyertaan di dalam Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi yaitu Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 jo Undang-Undang Nomor 20 tahun 2001 disebut sebagai pembantuan.Dalam putusan Kasasi Mahkamah Agung Nomor : 1769 K/PID.SUS/2015 menyatakan bahwa Terdakwa I Indra Gunawan Bin Alm. Saleh tersebut tidak terbukti secara sah dan menyakinkan bersalah melakukan perbuatan sebagaimana yang didakwakan dalam semua dakwaan Penuntut Umum dan Menyatakan Terdakwa II Irfan Bin Husen telah terbukti secara sah dan meyakinkan bersalah melakukan tindak pidana “Turut Serta Melakukan Korupsi”. Majelis Hakim Judex Factie Pengadilan Tinggi/Tipikor Banda Aceh dalam memeriksa dan mengadili perkara Aquo telah salah dalam menerapkan hukum atau suatu peraturan hukum tidak diterapkan atau diterapkan tidak sebagaimana mestinya, yaitu mengenai penerapan hukum pembuktian sehingga harus dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia.The participation is basically regulated in articles 55 and 56 of the Criminal Code, which means that there are two or more people who commit a crime or say that there are two or more people taking part to realize a crime. The participation in the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crime namely Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 is referred to as assistance. In the decision of the Supreme Court Cassation Number: 1769 K / PID.SUS / 2015 stated that Defendant I Indra Gunawan Bin Alm. Saleh is not proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing an act as charged in all charges of the Public Prosecutor and Stating Defendant II Irfan Bin Husen has been proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal offense "Also Participating in Corruption". Judex Factie Judge of the High Court / Corruption Court in Banda Aceh in examining and adjudicating the case of Aquo has been wrong in applying the law or a legal regulation was not applied or applied improperly, namely regarding the application of verification law so that it must be canceled by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia.

PERANAN KEJAKSAAN DALAM IMPLEMENTASI PENEGAKAN HUKUM PERATURAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG RI NOMOR: 02 TAHUN 2012 TENTANG PENYESUAIAN BATASAN TINDAK PIDANA RINGAN DAN JUMLAH DENDA DALAM KUHP TERHADAP PENYELESAIAN TINDAK PIDANA HARTA KEKAYAAN (DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA DI INDONESIA)

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agung Irawan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Legal Authority ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Case Files ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Sense Of Justice

ABSTRAKPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan memahami bagaimana Tugas dan Kewenangan Kejaksaan dalam Penerapan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung RI nomor: 02 tahun 2012 tentang penyesuaian batasan tindak pidana ringan dan jumlah denda dalam KUHP dalam kaitannya dengan perkara tindak pidana ringan Harta Kekayaan di dalam KUHP dalam proses Pra Penuntutan (Studi Kasus Perkara Pencurian di Kejaksaan Negeri Kampar) dan Apakah kendala dan hambatan yang dihadapi Jaksa Peneliti dalam Penerapan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung RI Nomor: 02 tahun 2012 tentang penyesuaian batasan tindak pidana ringan dan jumlah denda dalam KUHP dalam Tindak Pidana Ringan lingkup Harta Kekayaan.penelitian ini dilakukan secara sosiologis yakni berdasarkan fakta fakta yang aad dilapangan. Hasil penelitian menemukan bahwa Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam melaksanakan tugasnya dibidang para penuntutan dalam menerima berkas perkara Penyidikan oleh Pihak Kepolisian harus dengan seksama melihat apakah suatu perkara masuk dalam kategori Tindak Pidana Ringan yang dimaksudkan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2 Tahun 2012 atau tidak dengan berbagai pertimbangan yang dapat dipahami oleh Penyidik Kepolisian tentu saja hal ini akan memberikan rasa keadilan baik bagi Tersangka maupun bagi korban tindak pidana dan masyarakat pada umumnya. Kata kunci: kewenangan; penyelesaian; dendaABSTRACTThis study aims to find out and understand how the Duties and Authority of the Prosecutor's Office in Applying the Republic of Indonesia Supreme Court Regulation number: 02 of 2012 concerning the adjustment of minor criminal offenses and the amount of fines in the Criminal Code in relation to cases of minor criminal offenses. (Case Study of Theft Case in the Kampar District Prosecutor's Office) and What are the obstacles and obstacles faced by the Research Prosecutor in Applying the Republic of Indonesia Supreme Court Regulation No. 02/2012 concerning the adjustment of minor criminal offenses and the amount of fines in the Criminal Code in Minor Crimes in the scope of Assets. this is done sociologically, based on facts in the field. The results of the study found that the Public Prosecutor in carrying out his duties in the field of prosecution in receiving case files Investigations by the Police must carefully see whether a case is included in the category of Minor Crimes as intended by Supreme Court Regulation Number 2 of 2012 or not with various considerations that can understood by Police Investigators, of course this will give a sense of justice both to the Suspect and to victims of crime and the community at large.Keywords: legal authority; settlement; fines

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.

TINJAUAN YURIDIS MENGENAI TINDAK PIDANA YANG DITUNTUT DENGAN PASAL 351 (3) KUHP STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN MA NO. 1043 K/PID/2016

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-62
Author(s):  
Rahmat Saputra
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court

The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the actions of the defendant already fulfilling the elements of Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court Decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016 and to illustrate the basic consideration of the judge in imposing a verdict on a criminal offense charged with Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016. The method used in this study is normative law research. Data collection methods in this study were carried out with literature study, which is a method of collecting data by searching and reviewing library materials (literature, research results, scientific magazines, scientific bulletins, scientific journals). Data collection techniques using qualitative analysis methods. The conclusion in this study is the application of material criminal law by the Panel of Judges of the Supreme Court in the case of Number 1043 K / PID / 2016 which corrected the decision of the Banjarmasin High Court Number 59 / PID / 2016 / PT.BJM, dated 13 July 2016 which strengthened the Kotabaru District Court Decision Number 64 / Pid.B/2016/PN. Ktb, dated April 27, 2016 stating that the defendant Nanang Ramli bin (late) Syamsudin was proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal act of maltreatment which resulted in the death of the victim Jumadi alias jumai bin yahya ( alm) as stipulated in Article 351 paragraph (3) the Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code) is correct, it is in accordance with the Public Prosecutor's Subsidies indictment, and has been based on the facts of the trial, the evidence presented The Public Prosecutor is in the form of witness statements, evidence, post mortem, and statements of the defendant. The Panel of Judges of the Kotabaru District Court in its consideration there are still some shortcomings, especially in its subjective considerations, namely on consideration of things that are burdensome and matters that alleviate the defendant. The consideration used by the judge in this case only focuses on the perpetrators of the crime. Whereas Article 5 paragraph (1) of Law Number 48 Year concerning Judicial Power requires judges to explore, follow, and understand the legal values ​​and sense of justice that lives in society. This means that the judge must also consider the loss of the crime victim, and the community

scholarly journals Tinjauan Yuridis Peninjauan Kembali yang Diajukan oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum Terhadap Putusan Lepas dari Segala Tuntutan Hukum

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-151
Author(s):  
M. Jordan Pradana ◽  
Syofyan Nur ◽  
Erwin Erwin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Logical Concept ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Rules

ABSTRAK Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui secara yuridis terhadap kedudukan Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam mengajukan upaya hukum Peninjauan Kembali kepada Mahkamah Agung. Peninjauan Kembali berdasarkan Pasal 263 ayat (1) hanya dapat dilakukam oleh terpidana atau ahli waris terpidana, namun pada kenyataannya Jaksa Penuntut Umum pernah mengajukan permintaan Peninjauan Kembali dan diterima oleh Mahkamah Agung. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian normatif yaitu pendekatan yang menggunakan konsep logis positivis yang menyatakan bahwa hukum adalah identik dengan norma-norma tertulis yang dibuat dan diundang oleh lembaga-lembaga atau pejabat yang berwenang. Hasil penelitian diketahui bahwa terdapat kekosongan norma hukum mengenai kedudukan Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam mengajukan permintaan Peninjauan Kembali dan menyarankan dibentuknya aturan khusus mengenai kedudukan Jaksa Penuntut Umum dalam mengajukan peninjauan kembali. Kesimpulan yaitu Sesuai dengan Pasal 263 ayat (1) KUHAP Jaksa Penuntut Umum tidak berhak mengajukan peninjauan kembali, karena yang berhak mengajukan peninjauan kembali hanya terpidana dan ahli warisnya dan peninjauan kembali tidak bisa dilakukan terhadap putusan bebas atau putusan lepas dari segala tuntutan hukum dan diperlukan aturan khusus mengenai peninjauan kembali yang diajukan oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum, sehingga terwujudnya keadilan, kepastian hukum, dan kemanfaatan hukum. ABSTRACT This study aims to find out juridically about the position of the public prosecutor in filing legal remedies for judicial review to the Supreme Court. A review based on Article 263 paragraph (1) can only be carried out by the convict or the convict's heirs, but in reality the Public Prosecutor has submitted a request for reconsideration and was accepted by the Supreme Court. The method used in this research is normative research, which is an approach that uses a positivist logical concept which states that law is identical to written norms made and invited by authorized institutions or officials. The results of the study show that there is a vacuum in legal norms regarding the position of the Public Prosecutor in submitting a request for reconsideration and suggesting the formation of special rules regarding the position of the Public Prosecutor in filing a review. The conclusion is that in accordance with Article 263 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Public Prosecutor has no right to file a review, because only the convict and his heirs are entitled to apply for a review and the review cannot be carried out against an acquittal or a decision to be released from all lawsuits and regulations are required. specifically regarding the review submitted by the Public Prosecutor, so that justice, legal certainty and legal benefits can be realized.

scholarly journals Penerapan Hukum Materil terhadap Pelaku Pembunuhan dengan Unsur Penyertaan (Studi Kasus Putusan Mari No. 966 k/pid/2014)

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-28
Author(s):  
Elfirda Ade Putri
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Special Form ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Witness Statements

Murder accompanied by inclusion or carried out jointly is a special form of murder that incriminates the perpetrators. Basically, judges 'considerations in deciding cases, especially with murder cases, are sometimes not in accordance with applicable law, apart from that the sentence imposed is sometimes not in accordance with the perpetrators' actions, so that justice is not obtained, especially for the injured parties. There are differences in sentencing in each court, even though prior to sentencing, the judge has considered the same juridical considerations from each court level, whether it consists of indictments of the public prosecutor, defendant's statements, witness statements, witness statements, evidence and articles of law criminal. The application of material law by the Public Prosecutor in the Supreme Court Decision number 966 K / Pid / 2014 is not right. The public prosecutor uses the subsidair indictment using Article 338 paragraph (1) jo Article 55 of the Criminal Code. Public prosecutor did not ensnare the defendant Article Number 340 of the Indonesian Criminal Code, where the criminal act committed by the defendant contained an element of "planning".

ANALISIS YURIDIS TINDAK PIDANA PENGGELAPAN YANG TIMBUL DARI HUBUNGAN SEWA MENYEWA MOBIL DIKAITKAN DENGAN PASAL 372 KUHP

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-216
Author(s):  
Hurip Agustina ◽  
Dadang Suprijatna ◽  
Aal Lukmanul Hakim
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Bottom Layer ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Car Rental

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.

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 Criminal Accountability for Corruption Actors in the Form of Concursus Realist

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-332
Author(s):  
Redentor G A Obe ◽  
Indah Sri Utari
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
State University ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Design Data ◽  
Library Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic

The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze the criminal liability arrangements for the perpetrators of corruption in the form of concurrent acts, finding juridical reasons to the extent to which corruption in the form of concurrent acts can be justified. This research method uses a qualitative approach with normative juridical law design. Data collection techniques using library research Subjects library research law faculty of Semarang State University. Data analysis techniques: (1) presentation, (2) data reduction, and (3) collection and verification. The results of the study: (1) the form of criminal liability from the perpetrators of corruption in the form of a joint act is to follow the criminal procedure in the Criminal Code by dropping the absorption system which is made worse by the regulation contained in the Constitutional Court's decision in the results of the criminal chamber meeting of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Tangerang No 10 concerning the application of concursus teachings precisely in the parallel act of corruption. Conclusions of the study that the doctrine of concursus results of the criminal chamber meeting of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Tangerang has a legal basis that serves as a guideline or legal basis so that the action does not go outside the lines of statutory provisions in the implementation of decision making in imposing penalties for the perpetrators of acts corruption in the form of a parallel act.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document