Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"What can the small Mt. Zion methodist church in rural Mississippi teach us about the American dilemma over race? Quite a lot, it turns out. Founded by reconstruction methodists in 1879, Mt. Zion would later endure decades of harsh control by the white supremacist state. Segregated by Jim Crow laws and attitudes, Mt. Zion was also separated from its parent religious body, the Methodist denomination, between 1939 and 1968, as white Methodists created the segregated Central Jurisdiction for its black members: the move appeared as church-mandated Jim Crow. Mt. Zion survived the attacks by the state, and the benign neglect of the Methodists, maintaining its belief in an inclusive society by hosting the civil rights workers of freedom summer, who planned a school for black voters at the church. The church was drawn into the Klan conspiracy that included the murder of the three civil rights workers, the burning of Mt. Zion, and the beating of some of its members. Instead of grieving, the members of Mt. Zion began an annual ceremony that commemorated the death of the three and their mission to advance black rights, especially voting. The commemorative service is now an integral part of state and local efforts to create something new in this very red state, an alternate Mississippi that is inclusive, modern, and open."

"What explains the failure of transitional justice and reconciliation measures in post-authoritarian Indonesia? One explanation is that domestic political elites have effectively stymied the efforts of civil society to implement global norms of transitional justice. However as Indonesia has embraced a democratic and decentralized system of government, even the most corrupt and entrenched elites cannot merely veto or reject calls for justice. Instead, opponents have used a variety of strategies including legislative, religious, and cultural strategies to undermine justice initiatives. Examining the recent experiences in Indonesia, this paper shows the effects that a limited transition has had on the justice agenda."

"The history of criminal justice in the United States is often described as a pendulum, swinging back and forth between strict punishment and lenient rehabilitation. While this view is common wisdom, it is wrong. In Breaking the Pendulum, Philip Goodman, Joshua Page, and Michelle Phelps debunk the pendulum perspective, showing that it distorts how and why criminal justice changes. The pendulum model blinds us to the blending of penal orientations, policies, and practices, as well as the struggle among actors who shape laws, institutions, and how we think about crime, punishment, and related issues.Through a reanalysis of more than 200 years of penal history, starting with the rise of penitentiaries in the nineteenth century and ending with ongoing efforts to roll back mass incarceration, the authors offer an alternative approach to conceptualizing penal development. Their agonistic perspective posits that struggle is the motor force of criminal justice history. Punishment expands, contracts, and morphs because of contestation between real people in real contexts, not a mechanical swing of the pendulum. This alternative framework is far more accurate and empowering than metaphors that ignore or downplay the importance of struggle in shaping criminal justice.This clearly written, engaging book is an invaluable resource for teachers, students, and scholars seeking to understand the past, present, and future of criminal justice in the United States. By demonstrating the central role of struggle in generating major transformations, Breaking the Pendulum encourages combatants to keep fighting to change the system."

"Hingga saat ini, masih dikatakan belum adanya kepastian hukum bagi pelaku kejahatan yang membantu ataupun berkolaborasi dengan aparat penegak hukum, yang mana hal tersebut bisa membantu dalam penuntasan suatu kasus tindak pidana. Pasal 1 angka 2 Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2006 tentang Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban menyatakan definisi dari Justice Collaborator adalah saksi pelaku merujuk pada individu yang berstatus tersangka, terdakwa, atau narapidana yang berkolaborasi dengan aparat penegak hukum guna membongkar suatu tindak kejahatan dalam perkara yang sama, yang memiliki peran sebagai saksi dalam memberikan keterangan terkait suatu peristiwa tindak pidana, serta menjadi peranan penting atau kunci dalam penegakan hukum yang mana dapat mengungkap suatu tindak pidana yang terjadi. Dalam tulisan ini, ingin mendalami Bagaimana implementasi peran Justice Collaborator pada pelaku tindak pidana pembunuhan ditinjau dari kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan Nomor 798/Pid.b/2022/PN JKT.SEL. atau kasus Richard Eliezer yang mana Majelis Hakim menentukan pelaku utama pembunuhan untuk dijadikan Justice Collaborator. Dalam penelitian ini akan menuangkan beberapa pendapat-pendapat mengenai kasus pembunuhan ini dari berbagai sisi, menganalisis undang-undang yang diterapkan dari Majelis Hakim, serta kasus sebagai pedoman untuk menyelesaikan perkara hukum, dan kasus yang dipakai dalam penelitian harus memiliki kesamaan yang sudah berkekuatan hukum tetap. Temuan dari tulisan ini adalah masih banyaknya pihak yang berpendapat bertentangan mengenai kasus Richard Eliezer, dan juga ditemukan bahwa Majelis hakim tidak menguraikan secara jelas mengenai peran masing-masing pihak yang juga merupakan terdakwa. Selain itu, setelah menelaah lebih dalam penulis tidak meneukan tercerminnya pelaku utama dalam pertimbangan Majelis hakim dalam peristiwa tindak pidana pembunuhan kasus ini. Serta, menemukan dan mengurai juga mengenai adanya relasi kuasa dalam kasus Richard Eliezer. Sehingga, Implementasi regulasi harus juga lebih diperjelas terkait dari makna “pelaku utama” dalam peraturan Justice Collaborator.

---

Until now, it is still said that there is no legal certainty for criminals who help or collaborate with law enforcement officials, which can help in solving a criminal case. Article 1 point 2 of Law Number 31 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 13 of 2006 concerning Witness and Victim Protection states the definition of a Justice Collaborator is a witness who refers to an individual who has the status of a suspect, defendant, or convict who collaborates with law enforcement officials to uncover a crime in the same case, who has a role as a witness in providing information related to a criminal event, and becomes an important or key role in law enforcement which can reveal a crime that occurred. In this paper, we want to explore how the implementation of the role of Justice Collaborator on the perpetrator of the crime of murder is reviewed from the South Jakarta District Court Decision Number 798/Pid.b/2022/PN JKT.SEL. or the Richard Eliezer case where the Panel of Judges determined the main perpetrator of the murder to be a Justice Collaborator. This study will present several opinions regarding this murder case from various sides, analyze the laws applied by the Panel of Judges, and cases as guidelines for resolving legal cases, and cases used in research must have similarities that have permanent legal force. The findings of this paper are that there are still many conflicting opinions regarding the Richard Eliezer case, and it was also found that the judges did not clearly outline the role of each party who was also a defendant. In addition, after examining more deeply, the author did not find the main perpetrator reflected in the considerations of the Panel of Judges in the criminal act of murder in this case. As well as, finding and analyzing the existence of power relations in the Richard Eliezer case. Thus, the implementation of regulations must also be clarified regarding the meaning of the “main perpetrator” in the Justice Collaborator regulation. "