Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pembahasan dalam tesis ini adalah bahwa putusan MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 tentang Penetapan Tersangka sebagai Objek Praperadilan menciptakan peluang bagi penegak hukum melakukan pelanggaran HAM. Penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian kualitatif. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui pengamatan terlibat, wawancara mendalam dan kajian dokumen.Hasil penelitian menunjukan:1) Salah satu pertimbangan MK mengeluarkan putusan No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 adalah penetapan tersangka merupakan bagian dari proses penyidikan yang merupakan perampasan terhadap HAM, maka seharusnya penetapan tersangka oleh penyidik merupakan objek yang dapat dimintakan perlindungan melalui ikhtiar hukum pranata praperadilan;2) Keluarnya Putusan MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 berdampak pada penegakan hukum dalam sistem peradilan pidana di Indonesia, karena institusi Kepolisian, kejaksaan dan kehakiman merupakan institusi yang paling sibuk menerima aneka gugatan praperadilan dengan berpedoman pada perluasan enam objek praperadilan berdasarkan putusan MK tersebut;3) Dampak putusan MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 terhadap kompetensi penyidik Polri adalah dalam memutuskan penetapan status tersangka, penyidik dituntut lebih profesional dan lebih mampu menjalankan ketentuan dalam KUHAP dengan baik dan benar;4) Dampak putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 terhadap Penegakan HAM di Indonesia adalah, dalam menetapkan status tersangka, penyidik harus melakukannya secara hati-hati, karena penetapan status tersangka tanpa dua alat bukti, tanpa ada konfrontasi dengan calon tersangka, dan kesahihan cara memperolah alat bukti, merupakan tindakan sewenang-wenang yang dapat dikategorikan sebagai bentuk pelanggaran HAM.Implikasi dari kajian tesis ini adalah: (a) MA perlu mengeluarkan PERMA tentang batasan ruang lingkup Praperadilan; (b) DPR dan Pemerintah perlu segera merevisi KUHAP sehingga sesuai dengan tuntutan persoalan penegakan hukum pidana yang semakin kompleks dan multidimensi; (c) Perlunya melakukan peningkatan kompetensi para penyidik Polri dengan cara pelaksanaan sertifikasi penyidik tipikor berdasarkan kemampuan pengetahuan dan teknis penyidikan yang harus dimiliki; (d) Perlunya penyusunan SOP oleh Dit Tipikor Bareskrim Polri yang mengatur teknis dan administrasi penetapan tersangka setelah terdapat perluasan objek peradilan sebagaimana dalam putusan MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 tentang Penetapan Tersangka Sebagai Objek Praperadilan.

---

This thesis discussed about the decision MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 on the provision of suspects as an object pretrial create an opportunity for law enforcement do violations of human rights. Research used is qualitative research. Data collection is conducted through the observation involved, in-depth interviews and study of documents.

The research shows:

1) One of the consideration MK issued the ruling No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 is determination the suspect is part process investigation that is constitute deprivation of human rights, then it should the determination of the suspect by investigator is object which may be requested for protection through ikhtiar law pranata pretrial;

2) The emergence of the decision of the MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 impact on law enforcement in criminal justice systems in indonesia, because police institutions, attorney and judiciary is the institutions that the most busy received various a lawsuit pretrial with reference at expanding six object pretrial based on the judgment the constitutional court mentioned above;

3) The impact of the decision MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 to competence Polri investigators is in deciding the determination of status suspects, investigators are required more professional and more are able to run the provisions of kuhap well and correctly;

4) The impact of the decision the MK Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 towards enforcement of human rights in indonesia is , in setting status suspects , investigators have to do it carefully , because the determination of status suspects without two tools evidence , without any confrontation with the suspects , and kesahihan way to get instrument evidence , is a arbitrary who can be described as a form of violations of human rights.

Implication this thesis discussion contains: (a) MA need to spend PERMA about the limitations of the scope of Pretrial; (b) Parliament and the government needs to revise the KUHAP so that it meets the demands of criminal law enforcement problems are increasingly complex and multidimensional; (c) The need to increase the competence of the Polri investigator in a way the implementation of the certification investigator Tipikor is based on knowledge and technical capabilities investigations that should be owned; (d) The need for the preparation of SOP by direktorat tipikor bareskrim Polri which govern about technical and administrative of determination of the suspect once there is expansion the object of pretrial as in the ruling of MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 concerning Suspect As Object Pretrial Stipulation."

"Tesis ini meneliti perlindungan hukum bagi pengusaha Perikanan Pada Pelelangan Ikan Hasil Tangkapan Kapal Berdasarkan Pasal 45 KUHAP dengan menggunakan metode yuridis normative dan analisis kualitatif , perlindungan hukum pengusaha perikanan pada pelelangan hasil tangkapan ikan berdasarkan Pasal 45 KUHAP dan harga ikan dilelang dibawah harga wajar berdasarkan penelitian ini, pelaksanaan lelang barang sitaan berupa ikan berdasarkan Vendu Regliement dan Pasal 45 KUHAP, kurang memberikan perlindungan hukum bagi pengusaha perikanan. Penentuan harga tidak berdasarkan harga pasar dilelang dibawah harga pasar. Pengusaha perikanan juga kurang diperhatikan haknya pada. Kasus lelang ikan milik P.T. Alsum Kampar Semesta barang bukti dilelang seharusnya persetujuan pengusaha sebagai pemilik barang bukan dari nakhoda, Pasal 45 KUHAP ditinjau kembali agar lebih memberikan perlindungan kepada pengusaha perikanan jika akhirnya pengusaha perikanan beserta kapal penangkap ikan dinyatakan tidak bersalah. kerugian yang diderita oleh pengusaha perikanan tidaklah besar.

---

This thesis examines the legal protection for the fisheries entrepreneur at seized fish auctioned under Article 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code Law (Pasal 45 KUHAP) using a normative juridical research methods and qualitative analysis. Fisheries entrepreneur at seized fish auctioned under Article 45 Criminal Procedure Code Law (Pasal 45 KUHAP) is not fully protected by law and the price of the fish auctioned is below market price. The implementation of seized fish auctioned under Vendu Reglement and Article 45 Criminal Procedure Code Law (Pasal 45 KUHAP) does not provide legal protection for fisheries entrepreneur. The determiniation of the reserve price in this auction is not based on market price. The case of seised fish auction of P.T. Alsum Kampar Semesta, shows that the fisheries enterpreneur is not fully protected by law. The auction should be conducted base on the approval of entrepreneur as owners of the goods instead of the shipmaster. Therefore, Article 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code Law (Pasal 45 KUHAP) should be reviewed to give more protection for fisheries entrepreneur in order to minimize in the implementaton of seized fish auctioned under entrepreneur eiventually found not quilty losses suffered by the fisheries entrepreneur."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai kedudukan ahli yang termasuk salah satu alat bukti yang diakui dalam KUHAP belum sepenuhnya diatur mengenai ahli dari pihak non aparat penegak hukum. Hal tersebut tentunya kontradiksi dengan tujuan mencapai kebenaran materiil dalam hukum acara pidana itu sendiri, meskipun secara tidak spesifik KUHAP mengakui eksistensi ahli tersebut dalam Pasal 65. Skripsi ini mencoba menganalisa kedudukan ahli non aparat penegak hukum di dalam hukum acara pidana Indonesia berdasarkan KUHAP dan studi kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Sorong Nomor 63/Pid.B/2011/PN.SRG. Bentuk dari penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif. Penelitian hukum normatif pada hakikatnya merupakan kegiatan untuk mengadakan sistematisasi terhadap bahan-bahan hukum tertulis. Tipe dari penelitian ini adalah penelitian deskriptif dengan melakukan studi kepustakaan dan wawancara dengan narasumber.

---

This thesis discusses the status of expert evidence, including one that has not been fully recognized in the Criminal Procedure Code is set on a non-party experts from law enforcement officials. It certainly contradicts the goal of achieving accuracy of the criminal law itself, although the Criminal Procedure Code does not specifically recognize the existence of such an expert in Article 65. This thesis tries to analyze the position of non-law enforcement experts in the law of Indonesia under the Criminal Procedure Code of criminal procedure and case studies of State Court Decision No. 63/Pid.B/2011/PN.SRG Sorong. Form of the research is normative juridical. Normative legal research is essentially an activity to make systematization of materials written law. Type of research is descriptive research by conducting literature study and interviews with informants."

"This article attempts to scrutinize the role of expert under KUHAP and examine how Indonesian courts have interpreted and applied relevant rules and principles of the expert in selected cybercrime cases. It finds that the main role of expert in such cases is providing the courts with opinions on the legal and technical meanings of the legal provisions at stake and their contextualization in the cases. This raises a question whether law enforcement agencies comprehend the execution of the provisions. It also shows that law enforcement agencies are not always interested in getting digital forensic examination from which electronic evidence may be produced. It emphasizes that role of expert under KUHAP is equivocal and views the need to improve the role and principles. In order to improve the role of experts under Indonesian criminal law, the article describes and explains the salient features of expert evidence under Dutch law. The article concludes by making a series of recommendations."