Theoretical Study in Human Rights Perspective on the Private Private Vocational School of Understanding in the Dimension of Evidence in the Criminal Justice Process in Indonesia

In this paper the author argues that victims? rights are human rights. Criminal law typically views victims as witnesses to a crime against the state, thus shutting them out of the criminal justice process and only allowing them in when they are needed to testify. This is a major source of dissatisfaction for victims who seek validation in the criminal justice system. Victims are persons with rights and privileges. Crimes constitute violations of their rights as well as acts against society or the state. While human rights instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, do not mention crime victims specifically, a number of rights are identified, which can be viewed from the victim?s perspective. As individuals with dignity, victims have the right to recognition as persons before the law. However, such rights are only meaningful if they can be enforced.

Download Full-text

HAK ASASI MANUSIA VERSUS PIDANA MATI

10.31219/osf.io/wt2u8 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Boni Suparto Wuarlela

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Criminal Justice ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Research Method ◽

Secondary Data ◽

The State ◽

Right To Life ◽

Human Right ◽

Justice Process ◽

Criminal Justice Process

Human Rights are the basic rights of every human being as God's creatures who are equal to one another. The application of the death penalty by the state through a court decision means that the state revokes the convict's right to life which is an unlimited human right. Therefore, its implementation must take into account the rights of the convict. The purpose of this paper is to find out whether the imposition of the death penalty for criminals is against human rights. What are the criteria for imposing the death penalty for perpetrators of crimes that do not conflict with human rights? The method used is a normative research method using secondary data. It can be concluded that the imposition of the death penalty is against human rights. However, in its application, it can be justified on the grounds of defending human rights and only for crimes that go beyond humanity and damage human civilization. The implementation of the criminal justice process must be transparent and fair.

Download Full-text

KONSEPSI DAN APLIKASI PIDANA MATI DALAM PERADILAN DI INDONESIA

Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) ◽

10.24843/jmhu.2016.v05.i04.p06 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 5 (4) ◽

pp. 711

Author(s):

I Made Pasek Budiawan

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Criminal Justice ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Capital Punishment ◽

Human Life ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Psychotropic Substances ◽

Justice Process ◽

Criminal Justice Process

Imposition of the death penalty by the judge in the criminal justice process Indonesia still remains a debate among groups that agread with the group that oppose it. But in some laws for special crimes such as terrorism, corruption, narcotics, psychotropic substances, and a human rights capital punishment is still regulated, as well as of the criminal code and the concept of the criminal code by 2015 capital punishment is still based. The existence of the group that did not agree with the conception and application of this dying, argued that human life bussiness, my God, not the man to lift the perspective of the scientific criminal law that a death penalty still exists in all criminal acts by perpetrators of crimes with widespread impact as well as detrimental to the wider community the research for criminal santions was important to examine the existence of the norms of law as a basic for corrector by maximum capital punishment in Indonesia. Penjatuhan pidana mati oleh hakim dalam proses peradilan pidana Indonesia masih tetap menjadi perdebatan antara kelompok yang setuju dengan kelompok yang menentangnya. Namun dalam beberapa undang-undang tindak pidana khusus seperti terorisme, korupsi, narkotika, psikotropika dan peradilan hak asasi manusia pidana mati masih diatur, begitu juga KUHP dan konsep KUHP tahun 2015 pidana mati masih tetap dicanangkan. Adanya kelompok yang tidak setuju dengan konsepsi dan aplikasi pidana mati ini berdalih bahwa nyawa manusia menjadi urusan Tuhan, bukan menjadi kewenangan manusia untuk mencabutnya. Perspektif keilmuan hukum pidana bahwa pidana mati masih eksis untuk diberlakukan sepanjang tindak pidana yang dilakukan pelaku menyangkut kejahatan luar biasa dengan dampak luas serta merugikan masyarakat luas. Penelitian terhadap sanksi pidana mati penting dilakukan guna meneliti keberadaan norma hukum sebagai dasar pembenar dijatuhkannya pidana mati ini di Indonesia.

Download Full-text

ALTERNATIF PENJATUHAN HUKUMAN MATI DI INDONESIA DILIHAT DARI PERSPEKTIF HAM (Alternative of Death Penalty of Human Rights Perspective, In Indonesia)

Jurnal HAM ◽

10.30641/ham.2016.7.69-83 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 69

Author(s):

Bungasan Hutapea

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Criminal Justice ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Secondary Data ◽

The State ◽

Human Right ◽

Important Thing ◽

Justice Process ◽

Criminal Justice Process

Penjatuhan pidana mati merupakan bagian terpenting dari proses peradilan pidana. Penerapan pidana mati oleh Negara melalui putusan pengadilan, berarti Negara mengambil hak hidup terpidana yang merupakan hak asasi manusia yang sifatnya tidak dapat dibatasi (non derogable). Oleh karena itu penerapannya harus memperhatikan Hak Asasi Manusia terpidana. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui penjatuhan hukuman mati bagi pelaku kejahatan, bertentangan dengan atau tidak dengan hak asasi manusia dan kriteria penjatuhan pidana mati bagi pelaku kejahatan yang tidak bertentangan dengan hak asasi manusia. Metode yang digunakan adalah pendekatan yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan data sekunder. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa penjatuhan pidana mati bertentangan dengan Hak Asasi Manusia dan penetapan dapat dibenarkan dengan alasan membela hak asasi manusia dan hanya pada kejahatan yang bersifat melampaui batas kemanusiaan.AbstractThe death penalty is an important thing in the criminal justice process. Its practice by the state with a verdict, that means state takes a life right of convict which is a nonderogable right. Therefore, its practice must pay attention to their human right. The purpose of this research is to know death penalty of the offenders and its criteria against to the human right or not. This method of this research is normative juridical with secondary data. It concludes that death penalty against to human right and its stipulation can be justifiable by reasoning to defend the human right and merely on crime tend to beyond humanity.

Download Full-text

Criminal Justice, Due Process and the Rule of Law in Mexico

Mexican Law Review ◽

10.22201/iij.24485306e.2019.1.13131 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 147

Author(s):

Paola I. de la Rosa Rodríguez

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Criminal Justice ◽

Rule Of Law ◽

Due Process ◽

Criminal Activity ◽

The Rule Of Law ◽

Mexican Society ◽

Justice Process ◽

Criminal Justice Process ◽

The Individual

The criminal justice process should not involve obtaining the truth at any price. This article discusses how Mexico has adopted exceptional regulations which violate due process considerations and create a problematic breach of the rule of law. We argue that, at a time when Mexican society suffers the consequences of organized crime, the Constitution provides for two types of regulations: one protecting human rights, which are the foundation of the rule of law; and another which infringes on the individual rights of those suspected of having participated in organized criminal activity. We examine mechanisms such as preventive detention and preventive imprisonment and analyze their treatment under Mexican law as well as in international agreements. We explore whether or not the fight against criminality and the prosecution of criminals “by any means necessary” is more important that the protection of the human rights of those suspected of illegal activity. We conclude by suggesting that the response to criminality should not require limitations on the constitutional freedoms of citizens.

Download Full-text

Unburdening defendants with the human rights act: premature implementation?

The Cambridge Law Journal ◽

10.1017/s0008197399233016 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 58 (3) ◽

pp. 461-499

Author(s):

Ivan Hare

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Criminal Justice ◽

European Convention ◽

Justice Process ◽

Criminal Justice Process ◽

Human Rights Act ◽

Human Rights Act 1998

ALTHOUGH opinion is divided on the significance of the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”), most agree that the Human Rights Act 1998 is likely to have its greatest influence on the criminal justice process. The latest and best word on the implementation date of the principal sections of the Act is 2 October 2000, but its impact on the exercise of statutory discretion has already been felt as a result of the Divisional Court's decision in R. v. Director of Public Prosecutions, ex p. Kebilene [1999] 3 W.L.R. 175.

Download Full-text

ALTERNATIF PENJATUHAN HUKUMAN MATI DI INDONESIA DILIHAT DARI PERSPEKTIF HAM (Alternative of Death Penalty of Human Rights Perspective, In Indonesia)

Jurnal HAM ◽

10.30641/ham.2016.7.170 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 69

Author(s):

Bungasan Hutapea

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Criminal Justice ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Secondary Data ◽

The State ◽

Human Right ◽

Important Thing ◽

Justice Process ◽

Criminal Justice Process

Penjatuhan pidana mati merupakan bagian terpenting dari proses peradilan pidana. Penerapan pidana mati oleh Negara melalui putusan pengadilan, berarti Negara mengambil hak hidup terpidana yang merupakan hak asasi manusia yang sifatnya tidak dapat dibatasi (non derogable). Oleh karena itu penerapannya harus memperhatikan Hak Asasi Manusia terpidana. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui penjatuhan hukuman mati bagi pelaku kejahatan, bertentangan dengan atau tidak dengan hak asasi manusia dan kriteria penjatuhan pidana mati bagi pelaku kejahatan yang tidak bertentangan dengan hak asasi manusia. Metode yang digunakan adalah pendekatan yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan data sekunder. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa penjatuhan pidana mati bertentangan dengan Hak Asasi Manusia dan penetapan dapat dibenarkan dengan alasan membela hak asasi manusia dan hanya pada kejahatan yang bersifat melampaui batas kemanusiaan.AbstractThe death penalty is an important thing in the criminal justice process. Its practice by the state with a verdict, that means state takes a life right of convict which is a nonderogable right. Therefore, its practice must pay attention to their human right. The purpose of this research is to know death penalty of the offenders and its criteria against to the human right or not. This method of this research is normative juridical with secondary data. It concludes that death penalty against to human right and its stipulation can be justifiable by reasoning to defend the human right and merely on crime tend to beyond humanity.

Download Full-text

The Agreement of Uncontroversial Evidence and the Presumption of Innocence: An Insoluble Dilemma?

Edinburgh Law Review ◽

10.3366/elr.2002.6.1.25 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. 25-45 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Peter Duff

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Criminal Trial ◽

Presumption Of Innocence ◽

Justice Process ◽

Criminal Justice Process ◽

The Creation ◽

The Relationship

On 1 April 1996, a rather odd provision was introduced into the Scottish criminal justice process, namely a duty on both prosecution and defence to try to agree uncontroversial evidence in advance of criminal trial.1 As far as the writer is aware, such a provision is unique, although the philosophy underlying its introduction is not totally alien to inquisitorial systems of criminal justice.2 What is particularly peculiar about this duty is that there is no sanction for a failure, however unreasonable, to agree uncontroversial evidence.3 The lack of a sanction resulted from a concern that the creation of any penalty would impinge unjustifiably upon the rights of the accused. The intention in this article is to explore in detail the relationship between the duty to agree uncontroversial evidence and the position of the accused, and to suggest that the imposition of a sanction for a breach of this duty is not as problematic as was thought by those responsible for the legislation.

Download Full-text