IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 5 OF LAW 31 OF 2014 CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF WITNESS AND VICTIMS IN THE STATE COURT OF BANDA ACEH

Leny Oktaviyanti
{"title":"IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 5 OF LAW 31 OF 2014 CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF WITNESS AND VICTIMS IN THE STATE COURT OF BANDA ACEH","authors":"Leny Oktaviyanti","doi":"10.58471/jms.v1i02.117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Article 5 of Law Number 31 of 2014 concerning the protection of witnesses and victims regulates the rights of witnesses and victims and the author focuses more on the rights of witnesses in criminal acts of corruption, in matters of witness rights and will relate to the implementation of article 5 regarding whether or not witness protection is applied at the Banda Aceh District Court because the success of a criminal justice process depends on the evidence that has been successfully disclosed in court, especially witness testimony is an important factor so that witness protection is needed as regulated in the law. And one of the factors in the absence of application of witness protection is the difference in the testimony of witnesses of corruption in the BAP and in court. From the problems above, the problem is how to implement Article 5 of Law Number 31 of 2014 against witnesses of corruption crimes in the Banda Aceh District Court, and what are the factors causing the differences in the statements of witnesses of corruption in the BAP (Minutes of Investigation) and in court based on the judge's observations. The research method used is empirical juridical by conducting interviews, observations, and documentation. The results and conclusions of the study indicate that the protection of the rights of witnesses carried out by the Banda Aceh District Court has not been implemented as stated in Article 5 of Law Number 31 of 2014 due to many obstacles faced, starting from the authorized institution, namely the Witness Protection Agency and the Witness Protection Agency. victim (LPSK), budget or funds, and from the government. And there are differences in the statements of witnesses in the Minutes of Examination with those in Court based on research with the judge, namely there are three factors, the influence of the investigator, the influence of the defendant, and the fear of the witness.","PeriodicalId":141276,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Multidisiplin Sahombu","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Multidisiplin Sahombu","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58471/jms.v1i02.117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Article 5 of Law Number 31 of 2014 concerning the protection of witnesses and victims regulates the rights of witnesses and victims and the author focuses more on the rights of witnesses in criminal acts of corruption, in matters of witness rights and will relate to the implementation of article 5 regarding whether or not witness protection is applied at the Banda Aceh District Court because the success of a criminal justice process depends on the evidence that has been successfully disclosed in court, especially witness testimony is an important factor so that witness protection is needed as regulated in the law. And one of the factors in the absence of application of witness protection is the difference in the testimony of witnesses of corruption in the BAP and in court. From the problems above, the problem is how to implement Article 5 of Law Number 31 of 2014 against witnesses of corruption crimes in the Banda Aceh District Court, and what are the factors causing the differences in the statements of witnesses of corruption in the BAP (Minutes of Investigation) and in court based on the judge's observations. The research method used is empirical juridical by conducting interviews, observations, and documentation. The results and conclusions of the study indicate that the protection of the rights of witnesses carried out by the Banda Aceh District Court has not been implemented as stated in Article 5 of Law Number 31 of 2014 due to many obstacles faced, starting from the authorized institution, namely the Witness Protection Agency and the Witness Protection Agency. victim (LPSK), budget or funds, and from the government. And there are differences in the statements of witnesses in the Minutes of Examination with those in Court based on research with the judge, namely there are three factors, the influence of the investigator, the influence of the defendant, and the fear of the witness.
关于在班达亚齐州法院保护证人和受害者的2014年第31号法律第5条的执行情况
2014年关于保护证人和被害人的第31号法律第5条规定了证人和被害人的权利,作者更侧重于腐败犯罪行为中证人的权利。第5条是关于是否在班达亚齐地区法院适用证人保护,因为刑事司法程序的成功取决于在法庭上成功披露的证据,特别是证人证词是一个重要因素,因此需要根据法律规定保护证人。证人保护制度不适用的原因之一是刑事诉讼中腐败证人的证言与法庭上的证言不同。从以上问题来看,问题是如何在班达亚齐地区法院执行2014年第31号法律第5条针对腐败犯罪证人,以及根据法官的观察,导致BAP(调查纪要)和法庭上腐败证人陈述差异的因素是什么。所使用的研究方法是通过进行访谈、观察和文献记录的经验法学方法。研究的结果和结论表明,班达亚齐地区法院对证人权利的保护并没有像2014年第31号法律第5条所述的那样得到实施,原因是面临许多障碍,从授权机构开始,即证人保护机构和证人保护机构。受害者(LPSK),预算或资金,并从政府。证人在《审查记录》中的陈述与在法庭上与法官研究后的陈述存在差异,即有三个因素,调查员的影响、被告的影响和证人的恐惧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信