Analisis Yuridis Pembatalan Penetapan Tersangka Pencurian Dalam Keluarga Berdasarkan Praperadilan Nomor 26/PID.PRA/2018/PN.PBR

Manullang, Jhonson Wilsen (2019) Analisis Yuridis Pembatalan Penetapan Tersangka Pencurian Dalam Keluarga Berdasarkan Praperadilan Nomor 26/PID.PRA/2018/PN.PBR. Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text 151010144.pdf - Submitted Version Download (2MB)

Abstract

After the criminal procedure code (KUHAP) was enacted dated December 31, 1981 into law number 8 of 1981 concerning criminal procedure code (KUHAP), a pretrial institution was created that had never been previously regulated in procedural law. The pretrial institution was born because of the encouragement that the unavailability of the institution has the function to supervise and assess forced efforts that guarantee someone's independence in the HIR. In accordance with the results of the formulation of article 1 point 10, confirmed in article 77 states: that the district court has the right to conduct an examination and decide, according to the provisions in the law that have been regulated, regarding the first which is in accordance with the procedure or not the termination of the investigation and prosecution as well as arrest and detention. The second is rehabilitation of a person for a criminal case which is stopped at the level of investigation or prosecution. The main problem in this research is how the process of proving the pretrial ruling Number 26 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr and why the judge accepts the pretrial request in the ruling Number 26 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr. In conducting this research using empirical legal research methods that function to see the law in the community environment and the nature of this research is descriptive, in this case writing seeks to provide a systematic clear picture of matters relating to the process of proof and consideration of judges in the pretrial decision No. 26 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr The process of proving the pretrial ruling Number 26 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr is one of the processes that occurred during the trial. The purpose and evidence for the parties involved in the trial examination process are as follows: first, for the public prosecutor is an attempt to convince the judge based on the available evidence so that the accused is guilty according to the letter and the record of the indictment. Secondly, for the defendant and his legal advisors there is an opposite attempt, namely an attempt to convince the judge of legal evidence to declare the defendant acquitted. Third, for judges, where the evidence is used as a basis for deciding decisions. In the event that a judge accepts a pretrial petition in decision No. 26 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr because the evidence submitted by the applicant is in accordance with the provisions stipulated by the law. In deciding whether to accept or reject a pretrial petition is an absolute matter of a judge. In this case the judge decides according to the evidence. The judge must be thoroughly careful in ascertaining which party's evidence is more relevant so that in making a decision a judge is no longer in doubt.

Actions (login required)

View Item