scholarly journals Kewenangan Jaksa Agung Dalam Mengesampingkan Perkara Demi Kepentingan Umum

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-33
Author(s):  
Kiki Astuti Wulandary Sutin

Penelitian ini bertujuan; Pertama mengetahui penerapan pengesampingan perkara dalam memenuhi adanya kepentingan umum, dan Kedua mengkaji dampak yang ditimbulkan dengan tidak adanya instrumen hukum untuk melakukan perlawanan terhadap keputusan pengesampingkan perkara demi kepentingan umum. Penelitian ini merupakan tipe penelitian normative dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang, pendekatan kasus, pendekatan perbandingan, dan pendekatan konseptual.  Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan: Pertama Pengesampingan perkara terhadap perkara Abraham Samad dan Bambang Widjojanto dengan pertimbangan Jaksa Agung belum menunjukkan terganggunya kepentingan umum secara nyata; Kedua Tidak ditemukan adanya mekanisme untuk melakukan perlawanan atau upaya hukum terhadap keputusan pengesampingan perkara oleh Jaksa Agung sebagai bentuk kebebasan kebijaksanaan (beleidvrijheid) menimbulkan dampak yakni, keputusan pengesampingan perkara oleh Jaksa Agung bersifat final dan mengikat (final and binding),tidak mengakomodir hak-hak korban kejahatan sesuai prinsip perlakuan yang sama di hadapan hukum, dan kewenangan tersebut rawan terhadap penyalahgunaan kekuasaan. The study aims to : (1) describe the public interest that becomes the basis of a general attorney in dismissing a case; (2) explain the implementation of dismissing a case to fulfill the public interest reason; and (3) analyze the impact caused by the absence of law instrumen againts the decision of dismissing a case for public interest. This research was a normative study usinglegal approach, case approach, comparative approach, and conceptual approach. It was conducted atthe Provincial Attorney General’s Office of South Sulawesi. The results show that:(1) In the dismissing of a case, public interest indicates the existence of state’s interest and community interest. This is in line with the explanation of article 35 letter c of the Act Number16 of 2004 that have to. The scope is broadand there is no standard in defining the public interest. Therefore, it needs to be considered within the context of state’s constitutional principleaccording to the Preamble of 1945 Constitution. (2) The dismissing of the case of Abraham Samad and Bambang Widjojanto with the consideration of Attorney General have not indicatedthe disturbance of public interest. (3) There is no anymechanism to appealagaints the general attorney’s decision to dismiss a case as a form of wisdom (beleidvrijheid), which caused some impacts namely the decision of general attorney to dismiss a case is final and binding, does not accommodate the rights of victims according to the principle of equality before the law, and vulnerable to abuse of power. 

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 213-236
Author(s):  
Yodi Nugraha

In the Indonesian criminal justice system, every public prosecutor possesses the authority to cease criminal prosecution in the name of public interest. In contrast, in the Netherland, only the Attorney General (Procureur Generaal) at the Supreme Court has this authority.  This article discusses this authority to cease of terminate criminal prosecution in the name of public interest.  To do this a comparative approach is used in which the ruling of this authority to terminate criminal prosecution as found in the Draft of the Indonesian Criminal Code will be compared against the same regulation and policy used in the Netherlands.  A doctrinal and comparative law approach will be used. One recommendation resulting from this research is the need to re-evaluate the existing procedure and requirement of terminating criminal prosecution in the public interest in the Indonesian context and the introduction of Rechter-Commissaris into the criminal justice system.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-29
Author(s):  
Desi Ratnasari ◽  
Sahuri Lasmadi ◽  
Elly Sudarti

This article aims to identify and analyze the legal implications and analyze the regulation of public interest as a condition for implementing deponeering by the Attorney General for the sake of the public interest in the perspective of the development of criminal procedural law. This research is a legal research, obtained from statutory studies (statute approach), concept (conceptual approach), cases. The result of this research is that there is discrimination against equality before the law contained in Article 27 Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and can trigger misinterpretation by the Attorney General. Then in its implementation there is no clear regulation regarding the application of the opportunity principle related to the authority of the attorney general in the implementation of case waiver (deponeering) for the public interest in the Criminal Procedure Code.  Abstrak Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis implikasi hukum serta menganalisis terhadap regulasi kepentingan umum sebagai syarat pelaksanaan pengesampingan perkara (deponeering) oleh Jaksa Agung demi kepentingan umum dalam prespektif perkembangan hukum acara pidana.  Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum, yang diperoleh dari studi perundang-undangan (statute approach), konsep (conceptual approach), kasus. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah adanya diskriminatif terhadap equality before the law yang terdapat dalam Pasal 27 Ayat (1) Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 dan dapat memicu salah tafsir oleh Jaksa Agung. Lalu di dalam pelaksanaannya belum terdapat regulasi yang jelas mengenai penerapan asas oportunitas yang berhubungan dengan kewenangan jaksa agung dalam pelaksanaan pengesampingan perkara (deponeering) demi kepentingan umum di dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum acara Pidana (KUHAP). 


Author(s):  
Dirk Voorhoof

The normative perspective of this chapter is how to guarantee respect for the fundamental values of freedom of expression and journalistic reporting on matters of public interest in cases where a (public) person claims protection of his or her right to reputation. First it explains why there is an increasing number and expanding potential of conflicts between the right to freedom of expression and media freedom (Article 10 ECHR), on the one hand, and the right of privacy and the right to protection of reputation (Article 8 ECHR), on the other. In addressing and analysing the European Court’s balancing approach in this domain, the characteristics and the impact of the seminal 2012 Grand Chamber judgment in Axel Springer AG v. Germany (no. 1) are identified and explained. On the basis of the analysis of the Court’s subsequent jurisprudence in defamation cases it evaluates whether this case law preserves the public watchdog-function of media, investigative journalism and NGOs reporting on matters of public interest, but tarnishing the reputation of public figures.


Author(s):  
Marta Pietras-Eichberger

The study analyzed selected issues related to the scope of human rights and freedoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland and Russia. The author wanted to compare the regulations issued by a Member State of the European Union and a country outside the European Union, often using undemocratic methods of exercising power. The work focuses on research problems related to the principles of protection, the confrontation of individual interests with the public interest, and the impact of the regimes introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic on human rights law in both countries. The thesis of the study is that in the event of a threat to public health, analogous restrictions on human rights are introduced both in an undemocratic country and in a country belonging to international structures identifying with democratic values. The state of the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed, and in some area even contributed to the creation of mechanisms reserved for crisis situations, posing a direct and real threat to public safety and health.


Author(s):  
Michael Murphy

Abstract The prosecutorial independence of the Attorney General (AG) is a firmly established constitutional convention in Canada, but it is also an evolving convention, subject to ongoing contestation and debate. This article is a contribution to that debate. It defends a normative constitutional framework wherein the AG’s authority to make final decisions in matters of criminal prosecution is balanced against a corresponding duty to consult with cabinet and the prime minister on the public interest implications of prosecutorial decisions when the circumstances warrant. Within this normative framework, respectful contestation and debate amongst ministers, the prime minister, and the AG in determining the public interest merits of prosecution is welcomed, even encouraged, and if conducted with the requisite integrity, objectivity, and transparency, it is regarded not as a threat but as a valuable check and balance on AG independence and an indispensable form of quality control on the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.


Author(s):  
Kevin M. Baron

This chapter delves into the depths of one of the most important developments within modern American politics, the creation and institutionalization of executive privilege. In facing a fervent Congress in the grips of McCarthyism, Eisenhower issued a letter denying testimony to the Senate for the Army-McCarthy hearings. His letter included a memo from Attorney General Brownell that claimed the president had an inherent constitutional privilege to deny information to Congress or the public if it was in the public interest and for national security. This action institutionalized the Cold War Paradigm in the executive branch and created an extra-constitutional power for the president. Eisenhower issued several executive orders concerning classification and public dissemination of government information, along with the creation of the Office of Strategic Information (OSI) within the Commerce Department to oversee these policies. Eisenhower claimed historic precedent to justify his inherent constitutional power, regardless, it showed a learned response that changed executive power. Congress would respond in 1955 by creating the Special Subcommittee on Government Information chaired by Rep. John Moss, given jurisdiction for oversight on all executive branch information policies and practices. With the issue of freedom of information institutionalized in Congress, a 12-year legislative power struggle would unfold between Congress and the White House ending with the passage of the Freedom of Information Act in 1966.


Author(s):  
Royce Hanson

This book examines the impact of planning politics on the public interest by focusing on the case of Montgomery County and its land use policy. In particular, it considers Montgomery's pioneering approach to inclusionary zoning, the Moderate-Priced Dwelling Unit Ordinance, in terms of its effect on development patterns and the character and cost of housing. Montgomery was among the earliest fast-growing suburbs to stage development concurrently with the provision of public facilities. Its land use policies were efforts by the county's planners and politicians to solve practical problems in the public interest. The book analyzes the chain of strategic decisions that transformed Montgomery County from a rural hinterland of Washington, D.C. into a socially diverse urbanizing county of a million people in Maryland. This introduction provides an overview of the growth of suburbs and its implications for neighborhoods and residents, Montgomery County's suburbanization, and the organization of the book.


2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 985-1003
Author(s):  
Tracey L Adams

Given their positions of public trust, regulated professions are legally required to uphold ethical standards, and ensure that professional practice protects the public. Nonetheless, there is ample evidence that professionals do not always behave ethically. One proposed solution is greater organizational surveillance; however, research from a neo-Weberian perspective encourages scepticism about such arguments. Organizations may not only fail to stop professionals from violating ethical codes, but rationalizing organizations might actively encourage such violations in the name of efficiency. This article explores the impact of organizations and rationalization on professional misconduct through a mixed-methods study of professional engineers in Ontario, Canada. Findings suggest engineers are impacted by rationalization, and that those with less decision-making authority experience pressures discouraging practice in the public interest.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 195-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lize Zhang ◽  
Weiyu Zhang

Operating as a commercial business with public functions, Weibo’s pursuit of profits has to be balanced with the demands of citizen users. This article examines how the dynamics between increasing profits and preserving public interest manifests itself in Weibo’s monetization and how the dynamics impacts Weibo’s public functions. Drawn on evidence collected through participant observation and 19 in-depth interviews, this article first provides a description of the major practices of monetization. Next, it describes how the introduction of commercial elements, the cluttered product development, and the embrace with strong domestic capitals reshape Weibo’s public functions. Finally, it concludes with a discussion on the attitude of Weibo toward the dynamics between profits and public interest, and how Weibo’s pursuit of profits under the market influence has to be included when examining Weibo’s impact on the development of Chinese society.


1989 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
B Ashcroft ◽  
J H Love

A framework is suggested for the evaluation of the effects of external takeover on regional economic performance, and an approach is offered to identify the impact of takeover on the performance of the acquired firm. The approach is then applied to estimate the effects of external takeover on the performance of Scottish manufacturing companies between 1965 and 1980. The results show that external takeover improved sales performance but lowered rates of return in acquired firms. Employment was, in general, unaffected. Overall, the effects on acquired firms are judged to have been beneficial, but evidence of harmful effects on the wider regional economy suggests that it cannot be assumed that such takeovers will not be against the public interest.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document