Analysis of Non-Government Organizations Position in Filling Pre-Trial for the Purpose of Determining the Suspect

After Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 98 / PUU-X / 2012, NGO include third parties with an interest in submitting pre-trial proceedings by terminating investigations or terminating proceedings, but related to Post- Decision of Constitutional Court Number 21 / PUU-XII / 2014, it can be seen that there is an extension of pre-trial proceedings, one of which is the suspect's determination. It actually raises concerns about pre-trial object posed by NGO, whether or not it requires the determination of a suspect, it given that it is not written if it looks at grammatically. Based on background above, this research analyzes about first, can non-governmental organizations submit pre-trial applications for the purpose of determining a suspect? Secondly, what is the concern of juries’ respect to the position of Non-Governmental Organization that submitted a pre-trial application for the purpose of determining the suspect? This research is a normative legal research with an approach to laws, a philosophical approach and a case approach. Based on this research, it has been identified that First, NGO should first submit pre-trial applications for the purpose of assessing a suspect. Whereas, since Article 77(a), which is incidentally the subject-matter of pre-trial proceedings for NGO, has been extended, it should be interpreted that NGO also send pre-trial applications for the purpose of determining the suspect. Secondly, in some justices' reflections based on Constitutional Court's Decision Number: 98 / PUU-X / 2012 on May 21, 2013 jo. The justice considered, in Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, that the complainant as an NGO has a legal role in bringing a preliminary ruling against the object of suspect’s determination.

The orbitofrontal cortex, amygdala, reward value, and emotion

The orbitofrontal cortex receives from the ends of all sensory processing systems, and converts these representations of what the stimulus is into representations of their reward value. The orbitofrontal cortex is therefore a key brain region in emotions, which can be defined as states elicited by rewards and punishers. Indeed, orbitofrontal cortex activations are linearly related to the subjectively reported pleasantness of stimuli. The orbitofrontal cortex then projects this reward value information to other structures, which implement behavioural output, such as the anterior cingulate cortex, and the basal ganglia. A key computational capacity of the orbitofrontal cortex is one-trial object-reward associations, which are rule-based, and enable primates including humans to change their rewarded behaviour very rapidly. Decision-making using attractor neural networks is described.

Kewenangan Pengaturan Mahkamah Agung (Kajian Yuridis Terhadap Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 Tentang Larangan Peninjauan Kembali Putusan Praperadilan)

Peraturan Mahkamah Agung (Perma) Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 melarang pengajuan peninjauan kembali terhadap putusan Praperadilan. Perma ini telah menutup kesempatan bagi Pencari keadilan untuk mengajukan Peninjauan Kembali terhadap Putusan Praperadilan. Perma ini telah memperluas objek praperadilan, yang meliputi sah tidaknya penyitaan, penggeledahan, dan penetapan tersangka. Hasil Penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Mahkamah Agung berdasarkan kewenangan atas Pasal 79 Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 1985 tentang Mahkamah Agung sebagaimana telah diubah melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 2004 jo. Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2009 dapat menerbitkan produk hukum seperti Perma. Namun jika substansi dari sebuah produk hukum mengatur ataupun mencabut hak dari warga Negara maka hanya lembaga legislatif sebagai perwakilan rakyat yang sah mempunyai kewenangan untuk melakukannya.The Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) Number 4 of 2016 prohibits the submission of a review of the Pretrial ruling. This regiment has closed the opportunity for Justice seekers to file a Review of the Pretrial Decision. This regiment has expanded the pre-trial object, which includes the validity of seizure, searches, and the determination of suspects. The results of the study indicate that the Supreme Court is based on the authority over Article 79 of Law Number 14 Year 1985 regarding the Supreme Court as amended by Law Number 5 Year 2004 jo. Law Number 3 Year 2009 may issue legal products such as Perma. But if the substance of a legal product regulates or removes the rights of a citizen then only the legislative body as a legitimate representative of the people has the authority to do so.

PENETAPAN TERSANGKA SEBAGAI OBYEK PRAPERADILAN

Background of this article is the legal uncertainty after the Constitutional Court (MKRI) verdict No. 2/PUU-XII / 2014 on April 28, 2015 which has added pre-trial object with the determination of suspects, foreclosures and searches. The legal issues of this article are the philosophical foundation of the pre-trial, ratio decidendi of pre-trial verdict related to the determination of suspects and ratio decidendi of Constitutional Court (MKRI) Verdict No. 21 / PUU-XII / 2014 on April 28, 2015. This discussion and analysis of this article are the statutory, conceptual, comparative and case approaches. The conclusions of this article are: First, the pretrial philosophical foundation is to provide human rights protection in the use of forceful efforts by investigators and prosecutors. Second, the ratio decidendi pretrial verdict on behalf of Budi Gunawan and the Verdict of Constitutional Court (MKRI) No. 21/PUU-XII/2014, April 28, 2015 which has decided determination of suspect as objects of pretrial, has shifted from philosophy of pretrial in the Criminal Code and not according to the principles of fairness, certainty and expediency. The authority of the Pretrial Institution in the Criminal Procedure Code only examines the procedural truth in this case the investigator’s and prosecutor’s actions, while to examine the material truth related to the suspect’s acts is the absolute authority of the case trial session.