In this text, the criminal justice system will be examined in two sections. First, the law relating to important pre-trial matters, up to and including the admissibility of confession evidence in court, will be examined and, second, the institutional and procedural aspects of prosecution and matters relating to bail, classification of offences, trials, plea bargaining and the jury will be dealt with. In examining these topics, it is important to keep in mind the various aims of the criminal justice system and the extent to which the existing law serves these aims. Amongst the aims to be borne in mind are the following: (a) to detect crime and convict those who have committed it; (b) to have rules relating to arrest, search, questioning, interrogation and admissibility of evidence which do (d) to have rules as above which do not unnecessarily impede the proper to ensure that innocent persons are not convicted; to maintain public order; (g) to maintain public confidence in the criminal justice system; and (h) properly to balance considerations of justice and fair procedure with those of efficiency and funding. In the following article, Frances Gibb, legal editor of examines

2012 ◽  
pp. 355-357
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Fair Procedure ◽  
The Law ◽  
Confession Evidence

scholarly journals The Weakness Of The Law In The Republic Of Indonesia Number 18 Year 2003 On The Advocate

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Sofyan Wimbo Agung Pradnyawan
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
The Law ◽  
Fact Finding ◽  
Sense Of Justice

This article intends to analyze the use of the jury system in the criminal justice system of Indonesia, jury is a form of lay participation or the participation of lay that community of professional non-law in the judiciary, to make decisions which provide a more fulfilling sense of justice in society, in order to avoid the role of judges is absolute in the criminal justice process, in the legal system of modern states today dichotomy between legal systems tradition of common law or civil law is fading and towards the tendency to mix both the legal system in order to find substantive justice in the judicial process. Indonesia never make changes conceptually to the criminal justice system, so that the judicial process drab dominated the role of judges is great where law and justice seems to be the monopoly of a judge, the role of judges becomes absolute in determining aspects of the facts (fact finding) and the legal aspect in judge, legal research using law approach, conceptual, and comparative law. The results of this study is that morality is the essence of a sense of justice in society, morality can not be separated from the law, because morality is is what is considered correct by the general public, so the public will view the law as something that has no authority and can not be trusted, when morality is left in any decision of the judge in criminal justice. Entering jury in the justice system is able to raise the level of public confidence in the legal and judicial institutions that exist, because the inclusion of jury in the criminal justice system to prosecute in the aspect of fact (fact finding) addition will ease the task of the judge also made aspects of morality local is the living law in automatically entered in every decision, every decision so it is possible to better meet the sense of justice in society.

scholarly journals Investigating the Impact of Jury Sentencing Recommendations Using Procedural Justice Theory

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianni Ribeiro ◽  
Emma Antrobus
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Frustration Effect ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Justice Theory ◽  
Perceptions Of Fairness ◽  
Sentencing Recommendations ◽  
The Impact

Public confidence in the criminal justice system is critical for the system to function effectively. Two studies investigated the impact of jury sentencing recommendations on public confidence using procedural justice theory. The first study (N = 80) manipulated the presence of jury involvement in sentencing (voice present versus voice absent) and the punitiveness of the minimum non-parole period (more punitive versus less punitive) to examine whether giving juries a “voice”—a key element of procedural justice—would increase public confidence in the courts, as well as perceptions of fairness and legitimacy. Contrary to predictions, results revealed that a more punitive sentence led to increased perceptions of legitimacy, which was associated with higher confidence. The second study (N = 60) examined whether manipulating the Judge’s agreement with the jury’s recommendation—as well as the Judge’s reason for disagreement—would elicit the “frustration effect,” leading to a decrease in confidence and perceptions of fairness and legitimacy. There was no evidence to suggest that the frustration effect was present. Results of both studies could suggest that jury sentencing recommendations may not effectively increase public confidence and perceptions of fairness and legitimacy in the courts, however alternate explanations are discussed.

Criminal Justice in an Era of Mass Deportation

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid V. Eagly
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
State Level ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Collateral Consequence

After a sustained period of hypercriminalization, the United States criminal justice system is undergoing reform. Congress has reduced federal sentencing for drug crimes, prison growth is slowing, and some states are even closing prisons. Low-level crimes have been removed from criminal law books, and attention is beginning to focus on long-neglected issues such as bail and criminal court fines. Still largely overlooked in this era of ambitious reform, however, is the treatment of immigrants in the criminal justice system. An unprecedented focus on immigration enforcement targeted at “felons, not families” has resulted in a separate system of punitive treatment reserved for noncitizens, which includes crimes of migration, longer periods of pretrial detention, harsher criminal sentences, and the almost certain collateral consequence of lifetime banishment from the United States. For examples of state-level solutions to this predicament, this Essay turns to a trio of bold criminal justice reforms from California that (1) require prosecutors to consider immigration penalties in plea bargaining; (2) change the state definition of “misdemeanor” from a maximum sentence of a year to 364 days; and (3) instruct law enforcement agencies to not hold immigrants for deportation purposes unless they are first convicted of serious crimes. Together, these new laws provide an important window into how state criminal justice systems could begin to address some of the unique concerns of noncitizen criminal defendants.

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.

scholarly journals Legality Letter of Statement of Khilaf in Indonesia Criminal Justice System

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 128
Author(s):  
Rugun Romaida Hutabarat
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Criminal Matters

In criminal law, a person charged with a criminal offense may be punished if it meets two matters, namely his act is unlawful, and the perpetrator of a crime may be liable for the indicated action (the offender's error) or the act may be dismissed to the perpetrator, and there is no excuse. The reasons may result in the death or the removal of the implied penalty. But it becomes a matter of how if the Letter of Statement Khilaf is the answer to solve the legal problems. The person who refuses or does not do what has been stated in the letters is often called "wanprestasi" because the statement is categorized as an agreement. The statement includes an agreement which is the domain of civil law or criminal law, so its application in the judicial system can be determined. This should be reviewed in the application of the law, are there any rules governing wrong statements in the criminal justice system. By using a declaration of khilaf as a way out of criminal matters, then the statement should be known in juridical rules. This study uses normative juridical methods, by conceptualizing the law as a norm rule which is a benchmark of human behavior, with emphasis on secondary data sources collected from the primary source of the legislation. The result of this research is that the statement of khilaf has legality, it is based on Jurisprudence No. 3901 K / Pdt / 1985 jo Article 189 Paragraph (1) of Indonesian criminal procedure law. However, this oversight letter needs to be verified in front of the court to be valid evidence, but this letter of error is not a deletion of a criminal offense, because the culpability of the defendant has justified the crime he committed. Such recognition, cannot make it free from the crime that has been committed.Keywords: Legality, Letter of Statement, Criminal Justice System

Enforcing the Shari`ah in Nigeria

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 24-40
Author(s):  
Ogechi Anyanwu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Muslim Women ◽  
Social Solidarity ◽  
Northern Nigeria ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
The Law ◽  
Uncertain Future

The reemergence of the Shari`ah in northern Nigeria in 2000 is reshaping the Muslims’ criminal justice system in unintended ways. This article accounts for and provides fresh insights on how the fate of Muslim women under the Shari`ah intertwines with the uncertain future of the law in Nigeria. Using Emile Durkheim’s theory of conscience collective as an explanatory framework of analysis, I argue that the well-placed objective of using the Shari` ah to reaffirm or create social solidarity among Muslim Nigerians has been undermined by the unequal, harsher punishments and suppression of human rights perpetrated against Muslim women since 2000. A I show, not only does such discrimination violate the principle of natural justice upheld by Islam, but it also threatens to shrink, if not wipe out, the collective conscience of Nigerian Muslims that the law originally sought to advance.

The Legal Enforcement of Integrity

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-62
Author(s):  
Stuart P. Green
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Sexual Assault ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Political System ◽  
Legal Discourse ◽  
Bodily Integrity ◽  
Moral Concepts ◽  
Legal Enforcement ◽  
The Law

Talk of “integrity” is ubiquitous in law and legal discourse: Protecting the integrity of our political system has been cited as a basis for anti-corruption laws; preserving the integrity of the legal profession as a principle underlying the rules of lawyer ethics; ensuring integrity in policing and in the wider criminal justice system as a justification for excluding evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution; and protecting bodily integrity as a potential goal for the law of rape and sexual assault. This chapter examines what integrity means in each of these contexts, what these uses have in common, and whether thinking about these various rules and doctrines in terms of integrity rather than other moral concepts leads to any practical difference in outcome. It also asks what the examination of integrity in the law can tell us about the concept of integrity in other contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document