Hutabarat, Grasia Erika
(2019)
Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Praperadila Nomor 11/PID.PRA/2018/PN.PBR.
Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.
Abstract
The pretrial institution was born because there was a push that there were no institutions that had the function to supervise and assess forced efforts to guarantee one's independence in the HIR. The new authority and function delegated by the Criminal Procedure Code to a district court does not constitute the presence of pretrial as an institution itself. There are several definitions of pretrial that are regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code and those put forward by experts. Within the Criminal Procedure Code itself there are several articles that provide a definition of pretrial, namely based on article 1 point 10 of the Criminal Procedure Code that reads: pretrial is the authority of the district court in examining and deciding whether or not the arrest and detention is based on the request or his family or other parties on the power of the suspect, legal or whether or not the termination of the investigation or the cessation of prosecution for the sake of law and justice, and the request for compensation or rehabilitation by the suspect or family or other parties for their attorney who is not brought to court. The main problem in this research is how the process of proving the pretrial ruling Number 11 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr and how the implementation of the police against the pretrial ruling Number 11 / 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 the author seeks to provide a systematic clear picture of matters relating to the process of proof and implementation of the police against the pre -ail decision No. 11 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr. The proof process is a process that occurs during the trial to convince the judge of the truth of the arguments or arguments presented in a dispute. The purpose and evidence for the parties 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 indictment and indictment. Second, the defendant or legal counsel is an attempt to convince the judge based on legal evidence to declare the defendant acquitted. Thirdly, for judges the evidence is used as a basis for making decisions. In the case of the implementation process of the police against the pretrial ruling Number 11 / Pid.Pra / 2018 / PN.pbr this is the police has carried out the judge's order in the pretrial ruling to follow up the investigation. The investigator has also conducted a re-examination and the implementation of the investigator was in accordance with the Investigative Management Decree No. 14 of 2014
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
