scholarly journals ANALISIS YURIDIS BUKTI DIGITAL (DIGITAL EVIDENCE) DALAM PEMBUKTIAN PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA UJARAN KEBENCIAN PADA PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NEGERI MEDAN NO. 3168/PID.SUS/2018/PN.MDN

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-117
Author(s):  
I Made Dwi Krisnanda, Madiasa Ablisar, Sunarmi, Mahmud Mulyadi
Keyword(s):  
Hate Speech ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Digital Evidence ◽  
Criminal Conviction ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
Witness Statements

Law No. 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Procedure Code), has set the evidence that can be done in front of the trial. Article 183 of the Criminal Procedure Code implies that a minimum of 2 (two) valid evidence are required. Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code regulates valid evidence, namely: witness statements; expert statements; letter; instructions; and the statement of the defendant. However, since the trial of Jesica Kumala Wongso which was broadcast on television almost every day, it turns out there is one more proof that is not contained in the Criminal Procedure Code, namely: digital evidence. The object of this study is the Medan District Court Decision No. 3168/Pid.Sus/2018/PN.Mdn., Dated May 23, 2019, concerning the use of digital evidence An. Defendant HDL Alias ​​Himma for alleged "criminal acts of hate speech". Law No. 11 of 2008 as amended by Law No. 19 of 2016 concerning Amendments to the Information and Electronic Transaction Law which governs electronic evidence. The problems in this study, namely: the position of proof of digital evidence before the trial is associated with criminal conviction; use of digital evidence in criminal acts of hate speech on social media; and juridical analysis of digital evidence in proving criminal acts of hate speech in Medan District Court Decision No. 3168/Pid.Sus/ 2018/PN.Mdn.

scholarly journals Kedudukan Alat Bukti Website dalam Penanganan Tindak Pidana Terorisme (Studi Putusan Nomor 140/PID.SUS/2018/PN.JKT.SEL)

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Author(s):  
Gemaya Wangsa ◽  
Anak Agung Sagung Laksmi Dewi ◽  
I Wayan Arthanaya
Keyword(s):  
Digital Media ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
Device Classification ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
Case Number

The development of information technology and correspondence resulted in a shift in the format of print media to digital media, so that this growth was followed by the continuation of the development of a new criminal class that rode digital media in criminal acts of terrorism. This study aims to determine the regulations for the use of website evidence and the position of using website evidence in handling terrorism crimes in case number 140 / Pid.Sus / 2018 / PN.Jkt.Sel. This research uses a normative legal exploration method whose data comes from the determination related to the use of website evidence in Article 184 of the Criminal Code. The results of the research show that the determination of the exploitation of website evidence, which when based on Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code, means that electronic material is not classified as an abash instructional device classification, but if it is based on statutory regulations in a special crime, the electronic evidence media has resistance as a valid evidence, this can be seen in the provisions of Article 5 paragraph (1) of the ITE Law which are reaffirmed in the provisions of Article 44 of the ITE Law. Utilization of electronic evidence in the process of evidence in court is sourced from website evidence in law enforcement for criminal acts of terrorism in the Case Number 140 / Pid.Sus / 2018 / PN.Jkt.Sel scandal. Criminal Procedure, especially Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code, but has a judicial guideline that the judge cannot refuse to explore and decide the matters brought against him, provided that the law is unclear or non-existent, then the judges' rules should expose the meaning of continued and continuous law in the consortium, up to the provisions as contained in the ITE Law which regulates electronic instruction instruments as valid instruction devices.

scholarly journals SUATU KAJIAN YURIDIS TERHADAP PENGGUNAAN ALAT BUKTI ELEKTRONIK DALAM KEJAHATAN CYBER DALAM SISTEM PENEGAKAN HUKUM

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-25
Author(s):  
Ni Made Trisna Dewi,Reido Lardiza Fahrial
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Law ◽  
Witness Statements ◽  
And Function

Abuse in the electronic transaction because it is formed from an electronic process, so the object changes, the goods become electronic data and the evidence is electronic.  Referring to the provisions of positive law in Indonesia, there are several laws and regulations that have set about electronic evidence as legal evidence before the court but there is still debate between the usefulness and function of the electronic evidence itself, from that background in  The following problems can be formulated, How do law enforcement from investigations, prosecutions to criminal case decisions in cybercrimes and How is the use of electronic evidence in criminal case investigations in cybercrimes This research uses normative research methods that are moving from the existence of norm conflicts between the Criminal Procedure Code and  ITE Law Number 19 Year 2016 in the use of evidence.  The law enforcement process of the investigator, the prosecution until the court's decision cannot run in accordance with the provisions of ITE Law Number 19 of 2016, because in interpreting the use of electronic evidence still refers to Article 184 paragraph (1) KUHAP of the Criminal Procedure Code stated that the evidence used  Legitimate are: witness statements, expert statements, letters, instructions and statements of the accused so that the application of the ITE Law cannot be applied effectively The conclusion of this research is that law enforcement using electronic evidence in cyber crime cannot stand alone because the application of the Act  - ITE Law Number 19 Year 2016 still refers to the Criminal Code so that the evidence that is clear before the trial still refers to article 184 paragraph (1) KUHAP of the Criminal Procedure Code and the strength of proof of electronic evidence depends on the law enforcement agencies interpreting it because all electronic evidence is classified into  in evidence in the form of objects as  so there is a need for confidence from the legal apparatus in order to determine the position and truth of the electronic evidence.   Penyalahgunaan didalam transaksi elektronik tersebut karena terbentuk dari suatu proses elektronik, sehingga objeknya pun berubah, barang menjadi data elektronik dan alat buktinya pun bersifat elektronik. Mengacu pada ketentuan hukum positif di Indonesia, ada beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan yang telah mengatur mengenai alat bukti elektronik sebagai alat bukti yang sah di muka pengadilan tetapi tetap masih ada perdebatan antara kegunaan dan fungsi dari alat bukti elektronik itu sendiri, dari latar belakang tersebut di atas dapat dirumuskan masalah sebagai berikut, Bagaimana penegakkan hukum dari penyidikan, penuntutan sampai putusan perkara pidana dalam kejahatan cyber dan Bagaimanakah penggunaan bukti elektronik dalam pemeriksaan perkara pidana dalam kejahatan cyber Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yakni beranjak dari adanya konflik norma antara KUHAP dengan Undang-undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 dalam penggunaan alat bukti. Proses penegakkan hukum dari penyidik, penuntutan sampai pada putusan pengadilan tidak dapat berjalan sesuai dengan ketentuan Undang-undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016, karena dalam melakukan penafsiran terhadap penggunaan alat bukti Elektronik masih mengacu pada Pasal 184 ayat (1) KUHAP disebutkan bahwa alat bukti yang sah adalah: keterangan saksi, keterangan ahli, surat, petunjuk dan keterangan terdakwa. sehingga penerapan Undang-undang ITE tidak dapat diterapkan secara efektiv. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah penegakan hukum dengan menggunakan alat bukti elektronik dalam kejahatan cyber tidak bisa berdiri sendiri karena penerapan Undang-Undang ITE Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 tetap merujuk kepada KUHP sehingga alat bukti yang sah di muka persidangan tetap mengacu pada pasal 184 ayat (1) KUHAP dan Kekuatan pembuktian alat bukti elektronik tersebut tergantung dari aparat hukum dalam menafsirkannya karena semua alat bukti elektronik tersebut digolongkan ke dalam alat bukti berupa benda sebagai petunjuk sehingga diperlukan juga keyakinan dari aparat hukum agar bisa menentukan posisi dan kebenaran dari alat bukti elektronik tersebut.

scholarly journals BUKTI ELEKTRONIK SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI YANG SAH DALAM HUKUM ACARA PIDANA

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 463
Author(s):  
Ramiyanto Ramiyanto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Independent Evidence ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Functional Equivalent ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
Admissible Evidence

The Criminal Procedure Code as a general criminal procedure does not recognize electronic evidence as one of the admissible types of evidence. In practice, electronic evidence is also used as an admissible evidence to prove the criminal offenses in court. From the results of the discussion it can be concluded that electronic evidence in criminal procedure law is a dependent evidence and an independent evidence (substitution of letter proof if it meets the principle of functional equivalent approach and expansion of evidence) as specified in several special laws and instruments issued by the Supreme Court. The electronic evidence is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code as a lex generalis, however, to achieve material truth it can also be used as a valid evidence for the provision of all types of criminal offenses in court. It is based on recognition in the practice of criminal justice, some special laws, and instruments issued by the Supreme Court.Keywords: electronic evidence, admissible evidence, criminal procedure code, proof

scholarly journals Implementasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 130/PUU-XIII/2015 tanggal 11 Januari 2017 oleh Penyidik dan Jaksa Terkait Surat Pemberitahuan Dimulainya Penyidikan (SPDP) Diwilayah Hukum Pengadilan Negeri Banda Aceh

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-80
Author(s):  
Eddi Maulizar ◽  
Dahlan Ali ◽  
M. Jafar
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Jurisdiction ◽  
Banda Aceh

Pasal 109 ayat (1) KUHAP menyatakan “dalam hal penyidik telah memulai melakukan penyidikan suatu peristiwa yang merupakan tindak pidana, penyidik memberitahukan hal itu kepada penuntut umum”. Dalam penjelasan pasal ini tidak ditentukan jangka waktu yang pasti kapan Surat Pemberitahuan Dimulainya Penyidikan (SPDP) harus diserahkan penyidik kepada Jaksa. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Putusannya No.130/PUU-XIII/2015 tanggal 11 Januari 2017 menyatakan Pasal 109 ayat (1) KUHAP bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia tahun 1945 serta tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat apabila frasa “penyidik memberitahukan hal itu kepada penuntut umum” tidak dimaknai penyidik wajib memberitahukan dan menyerahkan SPDP kepada penuntut umum, terlapor dan korban dalam waktu paling lambat tujuh hari setelah dikeluarkan surat perintah penyidikan. Tujuan penulisan ini untuk mengetahui implementasi Putusan MK No.130/PUU-XIII/2015 tanggal 11 Januari 2017 terkait SPDP pada Wilayah Hukum Pengadilan Negeri Banda Aceh. Metode yang digunakan yaitu pendekatan penelitian hukum yuridis empiris dan yuridis normatif, dengan lokasi penelitian pada Kejaksaan Tinggi Aceh dan Kejaksaan Negeri Banda Aceh. Sumber data adalah data primer yang diperoleh dari penelitian lapangan dengan cara wawancara, serta data skunder dengan melakukan penelitian kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan awal implementasinya sering ditemukan penyerahan SPDP yang melebihi waktu tujuh hari sejak diterbitkannya surat perintah penyidikan. Setelah setahun berjalan, penyerahan SPDP melebihi waktu tujuh hari masih ada, tetapi sedikit jumlahnya, bukan karena penyidik telah sepenuhnya menerapkan putusan MK tersebut, akan tetapi selain untuk melaksanakan penegakan hukum, juga untuk menghindari praperadilan yang bisa saja dimohonkan terlapor dan korban.Article 109 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code stated that “in term of the investigator has started the investigation of the case which is a criminal act, the investigator notifies the public prosecutor about it”. In the explanation of this article, there is no definite period of time when the Notification Letter of Commencement of investigation must be submitted by the investigator to the prosecutor. The Constitutional Court in its decision No. 130/PUU-XIII/2015 of January 11, 2017 stated that Article 109 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and does not have binding legal force if the phrase “the Investigator notifies the public prosecutor about it” it is not meant that the investigator is obliged to notify and submit SPDP to the public prosecutor, the reported person and the victim no later than seven days after the investigation warrant was issued. The purpose of this study is to understand about the implementation of Constitutional Court Decision No. 130/PUU-XIII/2015 of January 11, 2017 regarding the SPDP in legal jurisdiction of  Banda Aceh District Court. The purpose of this study is to understand about the implementation of Constitutional Court Decision No. 130/PUU-XIII/2015 of January 11, 2017 regarding the SPDP in legal jurisdiction of  Banda Aceh District Court. The method used in this research is empirical juridical and normative juridical legal research approach, with the research location at Aceh High Prosecutor's Office and Banda Aceh District Attorney’s office. The sources of data are primary data that is obtained through field research by conducting the interviews and secondary data that is obtained by conducting library research. The results of this study shows that in the initial implementation, it is often found that the submission of the SPDP is more than seven days after the issuance of the investigation warrant. After a year of its implementation, the submission of the SPDP over a seven days period still exists, but few in number, it is not because the investigators have fully implemented the Constitutional Court Decision, however in addition to implementing law enforcement, it is also to avoid pretrial that may be filed by the reported person and victim.

scholarly journals BUKTI ELEKTRONIK SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI YANG SAH DALAM HUKUM ACARA PIDANA / ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE AS AN ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL LAW

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 463
Author(s):  
NFN Ramiyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Independent Evidence ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Functional Equivalent ◽  
Admissible Evidence

KUHAP sebagai hukum acara pidana yang bersifat umum tidak mengakui bukti elektronik sebagai salah satu jenis alat bukti yang sah. Di dalam praktik, bukti elektronik juga digunakan sebagai alat bukti yang sah untuk membuktikan tindak pidana yang terjadi di pengadilan. Dari hasil pembahasan dapat disimpulkan, bahwa bukti elektronik dalam hukum acara pidana berstatus sebagai alat bukti yang berdiri sendiri dan alat bukti yang tidak berdiri sendiri (pengganti bukti surat apabila memenuhi prinsip/dasar dalam functional equivalent approach dan perluasan bukti petunjuk) sebagaimana dicantumkan dalam beberapa undang-undang khusus dan instrumen hukum yang dikeluarkan oleh Mahkamah Agung. Walaupun bukti elektronik tidak diatur dalam KUHAP sebagai lex generalis, namun untuk tercapainya kebenaran materiil dapat juga digunakan sebagai alat bukti yang sah untuk pembuktian seluruh jenis tindak pidana di pengadilan. Hal itu didasarkan pada pengakuan dalam praktik peradilan pidana, beberapa undang-undang khusus, dan instrumen yang dikeluarkan oleh Mahkamah Agung.The Criminal Procedure Code as a general criminal procedure does not recognize electronic evidence as one of the admissible types of evidence. In practice, electronic evidence is also used as an admissible evidence to prove the criminal offenses in court. From the results of the discussion it can be concluded that electronic evidence in criminal procedure law is a dependent evidence and an independent evidence (substitution of letter proof if it meets the principle of functional equivalent approach and expansion of evidence) as specified in several special laws and instruments issued by the Supreme Court. The electronic evidence is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code as a lex generalis, however, to achieve material truth it can also be used as a valid evidence for the provision of all types of criminal offenses in court. It is based on recognition in the practice of criminal justice, some special laws, and instruments issued by the Supreme Court.

SHORTENED TIMELINE OF APPEAL AGAINST INTERIM COURT DECISIONS MADE AT A PRE-TRIAL STAGE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Medical Organization ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the problem of classifying interim decisions among those that are appealed in a shortened timeline, and determining the list of such decisions, as well as the closely related problem of determining the rules for calculating such a shortened timeline. Currently, the Criminal Procedure law provides for the possibility of appealing a number of interim decisions made at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings before the final decision Moreover, for appealing some interim decisions at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings, a general period of appeal is provided - 10 days from the date of the court decision, or the same period from the date of serving with a copy of the decision the person who is in custody, while for others a shortened timeline is 3 days from the date of the decision. Meanwhile, it follows from the literal interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation that within a shortened three-day period, court decisions on the election of preventive measures in the form of a ban on certain actions, bail, house arrest, detention, the refusal to apply them or extend their application can be appealed. At the same time, such a conclusion is not confirmed either in the positions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation or in judicial practice. Based on the analysis of the criminal procedure law, the position of the Supreme and Constitutional Courts of the Russian Federation, scientific literature and practice, several problems are highlighted. Thus, the author states the discrepancy between the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation when it comes to establishing the terms for appealing the court decision on a preventive measure in the form of bail. In addition, there is no single criterion for establishing shortened deadlines for appealing interim decisions, and there-fore, the list of such decisions requires analysis. In addition, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not contain a norm that determines the rules for calculating daily terms. The author formulates several proposals for amendments. It is proposed to determine the criteria for a shortened appeal timeline as the restriction of the constitutional right to liberty and immunity of a person that requires the immediate judicial review of the lawfulness of such a decision. It is also necessary to correct the phrasing of Article 106 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the procedure for applying a preventive measure in the form of bail, and establish the rule that appeal against such an interim court decision is filed according to the rules of Chapter 45.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code within ten days. The list of court decisions which must be appealed in a shortened timeline must be expanded by a court decision on putting a suspect or an accused into a medical organization providing medical or psychiatric care in hospital settings for forensic examination, as well as the extension of a person’s stay in a medical organization. In addition, the author has analyzed the approaches to the calculation of daily terms and proposes to amend Part 1 of Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation by establishing a single procedure for calculating daily terms, which does not take into account the day that served as a starting point of the term.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTASI TUGAS HAKIM PENGAWAS DAN PENGAMAT DALAM PENGAWASAN DAN PENGAMATAN TERHADAP NARAPIDANA (Kajian di Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Klas II A Purwokerto)

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dessy Perdani Yuris PS
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Internal Resistance ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court

The implementation of court judgments needs to be observed and perceived, thus the birth of Supervisor and Observer Judge Institution by Law No. 8 of 1981. The position of a Judge is not simply responsible for imposition of punishment, but also have to responsible for completion of punishment term by inmates in Correctional Institute by appropriate pattern and program of counseling. Besides in article 277 KUHAP till article 288 KUHAP it is charged another task as supervisor and observer of the court decision. The research results show that the implementation of the Supervisory Judge task and Observers in the execution of court decisions in Purwokerto Penitentiary is based on the Criminal Procedure Code Article 277 through Article 283 Criminal Procedure Code, the implementing regulations of the Supreme Court Circular No. RI. No. 7 of 1985. Supervisory Judge in the performance of duties and Observers in Purwokerto Penitentiary still met the constraints that are internal or external, internal resistance from law enforcement and the factors of factor means or facilities. Then the external barriers are the ruling factor.Keywords : Supervisor and Observer Judge, Purwokerto Penitentiary and prisoner

scholarly journals Peranan Dan Fungsi Praperadilan Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana Di Polda Jateng

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dodik Hartono ◽  
Maryanto Maryanto
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Active Role ◽  
District Court ◽  
Central Java ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Law

ABSTRAK�Penelitian dengan judul Peranan Dan Fungsi Praperadilan Dalam Menegakkan Hukum Pidana di Polda Jateng. Berdasarkan uraian dalam Tesis ini, permasalahan yang akan yang akan di teliti adalah: 1) Bagaimanakah fungsi dan peran praperadilan dalam penegakan hukum di Indonesia berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku? 2) Apa hambatan dalam pelaksanaan fungsi dan peran pra peradilan dalam penegakan hukum di Polda Jateng? 3) Bagaimanakah solusi dari hambatan dalam pelaksanaan fungsi dan peran pra peradilan dalam penegakan hukum di Polda Jateng?Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa : 1) Maksud dan tujuan utama yang hendak ditegakkan dan dilindungi, dalam proses praperadilan yaitu tegaknya hukum dan perlindungan hak asasi tersangka dalam tingkat pemeriksaan penyidikan dan penuntutan. Pasal 1 butir 10 KUHAP dipertegas dalam Pasal 77 KUHAP yang menyebutkan Pengadilan Negeri berwenang untuk memeriksa dan memutus, sesuai dengan ketentuan yang diatur dalam undang-undang. Wewenang pengadilan untuk mengadili dalam praperadilan dijelaskan dalam Pasal 95 KUHAP. 2) Hambatan dalam pelaksanaan fungsi dan peran praperadilan dalam penegakan hukum di Polda Jateng meliputi : a. hakim lebih banyak memperhatikan perihal dipenuhi atau tidaknya syarat-syarat formil penangkapan dan penahanan, atau ada tidaknya perintah penahanan dan sama sekali tidak menguji dan menilai syarat materilnya. b. setiap pelaksanaan upaya paksa selalu ada perenggutan HAM. c. pemeriksaan untuk melakukan penahanan, masih ada penyalahgunaan dalam tahap penyidikan oleh Polisi dan penuntutan oleh jaksa. d. selain luasnya kewenangan penyidikan dalam menentukan bukti permulaan yang cukup, pengawasan terhadap kewenangan tersebut juga lemah. 3) Solusi dari hambatan dalam pelaksanaan fungsi dan peran praperadilan dalam penegakan hukum di Polda Jateng meliputi : ����������� a. Diperlukan upaya kontrol terhadap setiap aparat penegak hukum pada lembaganya masing-masing secara vertikal. b. KUHAP perlu direvisi khususnya mengenai mekanisme saling mengawasi antara penegak hukum dan lembaga dalam subsistem peradilan. c. diperlukan peran aktif hakim dalam menggunakan kewenangannya pada saat pemeriksaan pokok perkara untuk mempertimbangkan penyidikan atau penuntutan yang tidak sesuai dengan ketentuan hukum acara atau yang melawan hukum guna menghindari penyalahgunaan HAM. d. dalam tahap ajudikasi, hakim seharusnya berkonsentrasi untuk menentukan hasil pembuktian di persidangan dan dalam tahap ini, hakim dapat menilai apa yang terjadi dalam tahap praajudikasi.Kata Kunci : Peranan dan Fungsi, Praperadilan, Penegakan Hukum Pidana�ABSTRACT�Research with the title Role And Practice Function In Enforcing Criminal Law in Central Java Regional Police. Based on the description in this Thesis, the issues that will be examined are: 1) How is the function and role of pretrial in law enforcement in Indonesia based on the prevailing laws and regulations? 2) What are the obstacles in the implementation of pre-justice functions and roles in law enforcement in the Central Java Regional Police? 3) How is the solution of the obstacles in the implementation of functions and the role of pre-judiciary in law enforcement in Central Java Regional Police?The results of the study conclude that: 1) The main purpose and objectives to be upheld and protected, in the pre-trial process, namely the enforcement of the law and the protection of human rights of suspects in the level of investigation and prosecution investigation. Article 1 point 10 of the Criminal Procedure Code is affirmed in Article 77 of KUHAP stating that the District Court has the authority to examine and decide upon, in accordance with the provisions stipulated in law. The jurisdiction of the courts to adjudicate in pre-trial is described in Article 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 2) Obstacles in the implementation of functions and the role of pretrial in law enforcement in Central Java Police include: a. judges pay more attention to whether or not the formal conditions for arrest and detention, or whether there is a detention order and not test and judge material requirements at all. b. every execution of forced efforts is always a rush of human rights. c. checks for detention, there is still abuse in the investigation stage by the Police and prosecution by the prosecutor. d. besides the extent of investigative authority in determining sufficient preliminary evidence, the oversight of the authority is also weak. 3) Solutions from obstacles in the implementation of functions and pretrial roles in law enforcement in Central Java Police include: a. Control of each law enforcement apparatus is required on each institution vertically. b. The Criminal Procedure Code needs to be revised, especially regarding the mechanism of mutual supervision between law enforcement and institutions within the judicial system. c. an active role of the judge in the use of authority at the time of examination of the principal matter to consider investigations or prosecutions that are not in accordance with the provisions of procedural law or against the law in order to avoid abuse of human rights. d. in the stage of adjudication, the judge should concentrate on determining the results of the evidence in the hearing and in this stage the judge can judge what happened in the pre-certification stage.Keywords: Roles and Functions, Pretrial, Criminal Law Enforcement

scholarly journals Kekuatan Hukum Hasil Tes Urine Sebagai Alat Bukti Dalam Perkara Pidana Narkotika

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 1953
Author(s):  
Rachmad Firmansyah
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Urine Test ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
Illicit Trafficking ◽  
Test Result

AbstractIn the context of carrying out the task of eradicating illicit abuse and illicit trafficking of Narcotics and Narcotics Precursors, the investigator has the authority to conduct urine tests on a person suspected of being an abuser, as stipulated in Article 75 letter l of Law Number 35 Year 2009 concerning Narcotics. The urine sample that has been taken will then be tested based on the development of science and technology in the narcotics testing laboratory which is then poured in the minutes of the test results. The minutes of the test results are valid evidence as determined by Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Someone who has a positive urine test result can be arrested and named as a suspect of narcotics abuse based on sufficient preliminary evidence. Suspects of abuse of Narcotics can be convicted in accordance with Article 127 paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Act. Thus the legal issues in this study is the Urine Test Results Are Used as the Basis for Assigning a Person to Be a Narcotics Abuse and Classification of Urine Test Results as Evidence As a Provision for Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code.Keywords: Urine Test; Preliminary Evidence; Determination of Suspect; Valid Evidence.AbstrakDalam rangka melaksanakan tugas pemberantasan penyalahgunaan dan peredaran gelap Narkotika dan Prekursor Narkotika penyidik berwenang melakukan tes urine terhadap seseorang yang diduga sebagai penyalah guna, sebagaimana diatur pada Pasal 75 huruf l Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika. Sampel urine yang telah diambil selanjutnya akan diuji berdasarkan perkembangan ilmu pengetahuan dan teknologi di laboratorium uji narkotika yang kemudian dituangkan dalam berita acara hasil pengujian. Berita acara hasil pengujian merupakan alat bukti yang sah sebagaimana ditentukan Pasal 184 KUHAP. Terhadap seseorang yang hasil tes urinenya positif dapat ditangkap dan ditetapkan sebagai tersangka penyalahgunaan Narkotika berdasarkan bukti permulaan yang cukup. Tersangka penyalahgunaan Narkotika dapat dipidana sebagaimana ketentuan Pasal 127 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Narkotika. Dengan demikian rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah Hasil Tes Urine Dijadikan Dasar Untuk Menetapkan Seseorang Sebagai Tersangka Penyalahguna Narkotika dan Klasifikasi Hasil Tes Urine Sebagai Alat Bukti Sebagaimana Ketentuan Pasal 184 KUHAP. Kata Kunci: Tes Urine; Bukti Permulaan; Penetapan Tersangka; Alat Bukti Yang Sah.

scholarly journals Verbalisan Witness Position as Evidence of a Criminal Case

Ius Poenale ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-86
Author(s):  
M. Kemal Pasha Zahrie
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Justice Practice

The presence of Constitutional Court Decision Number 65/PUUVIII/2010 expands the meaning of witnesses in Article 1 point 26 of the KUHAP, resulting in the emergence of various interpretations in criminal justice practice concerning the position of verbal witness testimony as evidence. Juridically, the decision creates problems considering that the Criminal Procedure Code or Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) does not recognize verbal witnesses' testimony as evidence. This study examined the position and the strength of verbal witnesses' testimony as evidence in criminal proceedings. After gathering all the data using normative and empirical juridical research, this paper concludes that the testimony of verbal witnesses is grouped in the evidence of guidance in Article 188 Paragraph (1) of the KUHAP because the testimony of verbal witnesses is not primary evidence. After all, its existence is contingent on the judge's willingness to employ it. The strength of proof of testimony of verbal witnesses is that they must satisfy the elements of Article 188 paragraph (1) of the KUHAP, namely the information referred to in the form of events or circumstances concerning a criminal act, as well as conformity with other evidence, as required by Article 188 paragraph (2) of the KUHAP.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document