Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"The criminal justice system encompasses the most severe instrument at the state's disposal in times of peace. For this and many other reasons, overuse of that system is a serious matter. It may present itself in different forms. Overuse of criminalization may mean that too much conduct is criminalized without necessity. Overuse of prosecution may present itself if too many violations of criminal offences are prosecuted, while in certain individual cases or specific categories of cases it would be more effective, fairer, more efficient or otherwise desirable to refrain from prosecution and/or to apply alternative means, such as negotiating justice or administrative fines. Finally, the criminal justice system can be overused through the application and execution of too many or too severe prison sentences. All these forms of overuse are discussed in this volume. It contains one introductory chapter, seven thematic chapters and sixteen chapters on individual countries around the world. Themes discussed in these chapters are, among others, the principle that criminal law is and must be regarded as a so-called ultima ratio or ultimum remedium, the relevant human rights framework, worldwide statistics, and legal and practical restraints as well as possibilities to solve overuse. Containing an extensive collection of expert knowledge, this volume intends to expose legal possibilities, good practices and the many challenges that lie ahead when attempting to prevent overuse in the criminal justice system."

"ABSTRAKA program titled "Operation Valkyrie" and implemented by the Illinois State Police for the purpose of interdicting drugs is presented as a study that illustrates reciprocity between a police organization and its institutional milieu. Information regarding this program was obtained from interviews with state police officials, from defense counsel who represented plaintiffs in interdiction cases, and from court records of Valkyrie interdictions. It is suggested that two aspects of its institutional environment, the environment of legal precedent in which the program is embedded and the network of state and federal agencies using similar interdiction strategies, influence the organization and activity of Operation Valkyrie. The article argues that current program activity reveals the way in which Operation Valkyrie is, in turn, affecting these two aspects of its institutional environment. "

"Undang-undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) mengandung beberapa asas didalamnya, Salah satunya adalah asas diferensiasi fungsional. Asas ini berarti penegasan pembagian tugas dan kewenangan antara jajaran aparat penegak hukum secara instansional. KUHAP meletakan suatu asas 'penjernihan' (clarification) dan ?modifikasi? (modification) fungsi dan wewenang antara aparat penegak hukum. Asas diferensiasi fungsional mulanya bertujuan untuk dipergunakan sebagai sarana koordinasi horizontal dan saling checking antara penegak hukum, terutama antara polisi selaku penyidik dengan jaksa selaku penuntut umum. Berdasarkan pasal 1 butir 1 dan 4 jo pasal 1 butir 6 huruf a jo pasal 13 KUHAP, maka jelas terlihat penjernihan dan pembagian secara tegas antara fungsi dan wewenang polisi sebagai penyidik dan jaksa sebagai penuntut umum serta pelaksana putusan pengadilan. Walaupun asas diferensiasi fungsional ditekankan antara polisi dengan jaksa, namun berpengaruh terhadap semua sub sistem dalam sistem peradilan pidana. Bagi Polri hal itu berakibat menumpuknya penanganan laporan dan pengaduan yang harus ditindaklanjuti yang pada akhirnya menyebabkan kurang maksimalnya pelaksanaan tugas-tugas penyidikan, seperti lambatnya pengiriman Surat Pemberitahuan Dimulainya Penyidikan dan bolak baliknya berkas perkara. Bagi jaksa asas diferensiasi fungsional telah menjadikan spektrum dan cara pandang jaksa dalam memberantas kejahatan menjadi sempit. Hal ini karena jaksa tidak terlibat secara langsung dalam proses penyidikan. Sedangkan pada proses persidangan di pengadilan, hanya tidak lebih dari mengkonfirmasi dan memverifikasi kebenaran isi Berita Acara pemeriksaan yang sebenarnya tidak mengikat. Sedangkan bagi tersangka dan pelapor / pengadu asas diferensiasi fungsional, telah merugikan hak-haknya karena perkaranya tidak dapat diproses berdasarkan peradilan yang cepat, sederhana dan biaya murah. Pada akhirnya asas diferensiasi fungsional menjadi salah satu penyebab over capacity pada lembaga pemasyarakatan. Lembaga ini tidak dapat melakukan pembinaan terhadap narapidana sebagaimana mestinya, bahkan dapat menjadi school of crime yang melahirkan residivis baru. Berdasarkan hal itu asas diferensiasi fungsional dirasa tidak dapat menciptakan keterpaduan antara penyidik dengan penuntut umum. Oleh karena itu perubahan KUHAP merupakan sesuatu yang urgent dan harus segera dilaksanakan.

---

Act No. 8 of 1981 on Procedure of Criminal Law (Criminal Procedure Code) contains some of the principles therein. The one of them is functional differentiation principle. The functional differentiation principle means the affirmation of the division of duties and authority between the law enforcement officers in institutional. The criminal procedure code put a principle of "purification" (clarification) and ?modification? functions and powers among law enforcement officers. The functional differentiation principle originally intended to be used as a means of horizontal coordination and mutual checking between law enforcement agencies, especially between polices as investigator and prosecutors as public prosecutor. Based on criminal procedure code article 1, point 1 and 4 jo article 1 point 6 letter a jo article 13, it is clearly seen purification and distribution between the functions and powers of the police as investigators and prosecutors as a public prosecutor and executor of verdict. Although the principle of functional differentiation stressed in between the investigators and the public prosecutor, but it influent all the sub systems in criminal justice system. For the police, it resulted in deposition of handling reports and complaints that should be followed up, in the end it can be implementation tasks which is not fulfilled maximal, such as the slow delivery of the notice of investigation letter and back and forth the docket. For prosecutors, principle of functional differentiation has made spectrum and perspective in combating crimes prosecutor becomes narrower. This is because prosecutors are not directly involved in investigation process. The trial process in court is nothing more than confirmation and verifying the correctness of the content of the examination dossier which is not binding. At the same time, for the suspect and the complainant, the functional differentiation principle has been detrimental to their rights because the case can't be processed with fast, simple and low cost trial. In the end the principle of functional differentiation be one cause of over capacity in the penitentiary. This institution can not conduct training of prisoners, even can be a school crime that spawned a new recidivist. Based on this principle of functional differentiation deemed not to create integration between law enforcement agencies, especially the investigators with the prosecutors. Therefore, conversion of the criminal procedure code is urgent and should be implemented immediately."

"

 Peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur tentang pengelolaan aset tindak pidana hanya KUHAP dan PP KUHAP, bahwa Rupbasan sebagai tempat menyimpan dan mengelola aset tindak pidana. Tetapi, masih terdapat pengelolaan aset tindak pidana di luar Rupbasan. Sehingga, Peran Rupbasan belum optimal. Tanggung jawab atas pengelolaan aset tindak pidana tersebut akan berdampat pada terpenuhi atau tidaknya upaya pemulihan aset dan hak-hak korban atas benda. Hal ini menimbulkan permasalahan, yaitu: bagaimana pelaksanaan KUHAP beserta ketentuan pidananya, bagaimana hubungan antara Rupbasan dengan sub-sistem peradilan pidana lainnya terkait aset tindak pidana, serta bagaimana peran Rupbasan sebagai pelaksana asset recovery. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode yuridis normatif, dengan menggunakan data primer dan sekunder. Hasil penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa belum terlaksananya KUHAP dan PP KUHAP dengan baik masing karena adanya peraturan internal masing-masing instansi dan ketentuan pidana tentang tindakan melawan hukum terhadap aset tindak pidana diatur dalam KUHP dan RKUHP. Peran Rupbasan dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana ada pada tahap pra-ajudikasi, ajudikasi, dan purna ajudikasi sehingga Rupbasan memiliki hubungan dengan semua sub-sistem peradilan pidana berkaitan dengan aset tindak pidana. Peran Rupbasan juga sangat besar dalam upaya asset recovery yang dimulai pada tahap securing sampai dengan repatriation, tetapi belum ada aturan yang mengatur mengenai asset recovery dan lembaga pengelola asetnya. Saran atas permasalahan ini adalah pengembangan peraturan setingkat UU mengenai Rupbasan dan pengelolaan aset tindak pidana. Peran Lembaga Pengelola Aset dalam RUU Perampasan Aset dilaksanakan oleh Rupbasan.

---

The regulation legislate about criminal asset management only Criminal Procedures Code of Indonesia and implementary regulation, that Rupbasan as an asset management institution. However, there still criminal asset management are outside of Rupbasan. So, role of Rupbasan does not optimal yet. The responsibility for the criminal assets will has an impact on fulfilled or not of the asset recovery and the human rights of properties. The problems is how the implementation of the Criminal Procedure Code along with criminal law, how is the relationship between Rupbasan and other sub-system of criminal justice system related to criminal asset management, and how is role of Rupbasan as implementer of asset recovery. The method used in this research is a normative juridical method, using primary and secondary data. The results of the research conclude that the implementation of the Criminal Procedure Code and implementary regulation has not been implemented properly because there are internal regulations of each institution and the punishment about illegal action against criminal assets regulated in Criminal Code of Indonesia and Bill of Criminal Code of Indonesia. Rupbasan’s role in Criminal Justice System is in pre-adjudication, adjudication, and post-adjudication, so Rupbasan has relationship with each sub-system relate to seizure and forfeiture. Rupbasans role also in asset recovery which starts in the securing until to repatriation, but there are no rules about asset recovery and asset management. Suggestions for the problems are the development of regulations regarding Rupbasan and the criminal asset management. Role of Lembaga Pengelola Aset in Bill of Asset Recovery was handled by Rupbasan.

"