The Upheaval That Happened in the Judge's Decision Returning Evidence to the Public Prosecutor for Use in Other Cases

Dipto Brahmono

Abstract


The purpose of this research is toexplain the formulation regarding the return of evidence in the Criminal Procedure Code and analyze what upheavals can occur in the judge's decision to return evidence to the public prosecutor to be used in other cases if the case has not been investigated. This study uses an approach normative juridical which in this case relates to the judge's decisionreturn evidence to the public prosecutor to be used in other cases, while the case has not yet been investigated, using descriptive analytical research specifications. The data used are primary, secondary, and tertiary data which will be analyzednormative qualitative. Research problems are analyzed using the theory of legal certainty, theory of proof according to law in a negative way, and several principles of criminal law. The results of the study concluded that:upheaval that can occur in a Judge's Decision that returns evidence to the Public Prosecutor to be used in other cases even though the other case does not yet exist, namely: a. The judge did not implement the provisions in Article 46 paragraph (2) of Act No. 8 of 1981, because there is no relationship between the evidence and the Public Prosecutor for the judge's decision to return the evidence to the Public Prosecutor for use in other cases while the other case does not yet exist . b. Upheaval that could occur in delaying the implementation of the decision, because it is possible for legal action from both the defendant and the public prosecutor related to evidence. c. The Judge has intervened in the Investigation through the Judge's decision, by submitting evidence to the Public Prosecutor to be used in other cases while the other cases do not yet exist. So, a synchronization is needed between law enforcement officials regarding the implementation of the provisions of Article 46 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code, so that legal certainty can be created.

Keywords


Decision; Evidence; Judge.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ahmad Rifai, 2010, Legal Findings by Judges in a Progressive Legal Perspective, Sinar Graphic, Jakarta.

Alfred M. Scott, Supreme Court V Constitution, as quoted again by, Bagir Manan, "Judicial Precedent and Stare Decisis (As Introduction)", Varia Judicial, Edition No. 347 XXX, (October 2014).

Andi Hamzah, 2008, Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, Sinar Offset Graphic, Jakarta.

Anton Bakker and Achmad Charris Zubair, 1990, Philosophical Research Methodology, Kanisius, Yogyakarta.

Artidjo Alkostar, "Dimensions of Truth in Court Decisions", Varia Judicial, Edition No. 281 XXIV, (April 2009).

Asep Dedi Suwasta, 2011, Positive Indonesian Law Interpretation, Ali Publishing, Bandung.

Bagir Manan, "Judges As Law Reformers", Varia Judicial, Edition No. 254 XXII, (January 2007).

Bambang Poernomo, 1983, Principles of Criminal Law, PT. Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta.

Bambang Sunggono, 2006, Legal Research Methodology, PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.

Bambang Sutiyoso, 2006, Legal Discovery Methods to Create Certain and Just Laws, UII Press, Yogyakarta.

Barda Nawawi Arief, Renewal/Reconstruction of Education and Development of Criminal Law Science in the Context of National and Global Outlook, Paper presented at the National Seminar and Congress of the Association of Indonesian Criminal Law and Criminology Lecturers (ASPEHUPIKI), Hotel Savoy Homan, Bandung, (17 March 2008).

Basuki Rekso Wibowo, "Legal Renewal with the Face of Justice", Varia Judicial, Edition No. 313 XXVII, (December 2011).

Caslac Pejoviv, “Civil Law and Common Law: Two Different Paths Leading To The Same Goal,†inhttps://www.victoria.ac.nz/law/research/publications/about-nz/law/research/publications/nzacl-yearsbooks/yearbook-6-2000/pejovic.pdf, accessed September 10, 2022.

Dian Andriawan Dg Tawang and Novina Sri Indiharti, Juridical Analysis of the Principle of Ius Curia Novit inhttp://portal.kopertis3.or.id/bitstream/123456789/1874/1/AnalisisJuridical Against the Principle of Ius Curia Novit in Civil Procedure Law.pdf,accessed on 10 September 2022.

Lilik Mulyadi, 2008, Anthology of Criminal Law Perspectives, Theoretical, and Practice, Alumni, Bandung.

Lilik Mulyadi, as contained in Muchsin's HAL Paper, The Role of Judge Decisions on Domestic Violence, Varia Perjudi Law Magazine, Edition No. 260 July 2006, Ikahi, Jakarta, (2007).

Mardjono Reksodiputro, Anthology of Problems in the Criminal Justice System -Fifth Book Collection, Center for Justice Services and Legal Service (formerly the Institute of Criminology) University of Indonesia, Jakarta.

Miftakhul Huda, “Ius Curia Novitâ€, inhttps://www.miftakhulhuda.com/2011/02/ius-curia-novit.html, accessed on September 9, 2022.

Pontang Moerad, 2005, Formation of Law through Court Decisions in Criminal Cases, Alumni.

Republic of Indonesia, Act No. 8 of 1981 concerning Criminal Procedure Code.

Ronny Hanitijo Soemitro, 1990, Legal and Yurimetric Research Methodology, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta.

Ronny Hanitijo Soemitro, Comparison Between Normative Legal Research and Empirical Legal Research, In the Journal of Legal Issues, (Semarang: Diponegoro University Publisher, Number 9, (1991).

Soerjono Soekanto, 1986, Introduction to Legal Research, UI-Press, Jakarta.

Sudikno Mertokusumo, 1998, Indonesian Civil Procedure Code, Liberty, Yogyakarta.

Yudi Kristiana, 2009, Towards a Progressive Prosecutor's Office Study of Investigation, Investigation and Prosecution of Criminal Acts, LSHP-Indonesia, Yogyakarta.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/rlj.1.4.%25p

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Ratio Legis Journal has been indexed in: