IMPLEMENTASI LEMBAGA PRAPERADILAN UNTUK PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM HAK-HAK TERSANGKA (STUDI KASUS DI PENGADILAN NEGERI TENGGARONG)

  • Sujiono S
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In principle, the institution is still relevant pretrial maintained and do not need to be replaced with the judge commissioner. It's just the rules of pretrial in the Criminal Code needs to be refined. There are two important things that need to be revised so that should not be a dilemma in practice. The first is about the verdict fall. According to Article 82 paragraph (1) letter d Criminal Code, if the case has not been checked pretrial, pretrial fall if the case should be decided principally already checked. True, that on the legitimacy of the arrest or detention-which was filed pretrial can be examined together with the examination of the subject matter, so it does not matter if only pretrial disqualified because the subject matter has begun to be examined. However, it would mubazirnya judicial institution established by law, if only by reason of the subject matter already checked then pretrial shall be disqualified

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sujiono, S. (2013). IMPLEMENTASI LEMBAGA PRAPERADILAN UNTUK PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM HAK-HAK TERSANGKA (STUDI KASUS DI PENGADILAN NEGERI TENGGARONG). Arena Hukum, 6(2), 272–289. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2013.00602.8

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free