Pembuktian Terbalik Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Ditinjau Dari Asas Praduga Tidak Bersalah (Presumption of Innocence)

Bayu Dwi Putra, Muhammad Hendri Yanova
{"title":"Pembuktian Terbalik Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Ditinjau Dari Asas Praduga Tidak Bersalah (Presumption of Innocence)","authors":"Bayu Dwi Putra, Muhammad Hendri Yanova","doi":"10.51749/jphi.v3i2.79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to examine and analyze the regulation and application of the reverse evidence system in the Corruption Eradication Act. This research is a normative legal research, the nature of prescriptive research is to re-examine according to legal theory against norms that are considered still unclear. The results of this study indicate that the regulation of reverse proof of corruption begins with Law Number 3 of 1971 concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption which has explicitly included it in Article 17. In its development, Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption also regulates the reverse evidence, namely in Article 37. However, the policy in the formulation of the reversed evidence has not been able to represent the circumstances and situations in handling corruption crimes at that time where corruption was an extraordinary crime that had caused financial losses. country. The issuance of Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes provides a clearer policy direction than the previous law, namely by improving the formulation of reverse evidence. The implication of the reverse proof system with this change is that there are two types of reverse proof systems contained in the law on eradicating corruption, namely balanced limited reverse proof and pure/full reverse proof.\n ","PeriodicalId":146948,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Indonesia","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Indonesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51749/jphi.v3i2.79","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study aims to examine and analyze the regulation and application of the reverse evidence system in the Corruption Eradication Act. This research is a normative legal research, the nature of prescriptive research is to re-examine according to legal theory against norms that are considered still unclear. The results of this study indicate that the regulation of reverse proof of corruption begins with Law Number 3 of 1971 concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption which has explicitly included it in Article 17. In its development, Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption also regulates the reverse evidence, namely in Article 37. However, the policy in the formulation of the reversed evidence has not been able to represent the circumstances and situations in handling corruption crimes at that time where corruption was an extraordinary crime that had caused financial losses. country. The issuance of Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes provides a clearer policy direction than the previous law, namely by improving the formulation of reverse evidence. The implication of the reverse proof system with this change is that there are two types of reverse proof systems contained in the law on eradicating corruption, namely balanced limited reverse proof and pure/full reverse proof.  
“无罪推定原则”是对腐败刑事指控的反证
本研究旨在检视与分析《清廉法》中反证制度的规定与适用。这种研究是一种规范性的法律研究,规定性研究的本质是根据法律理论对被认为尚不明确的规范进行重新审视。这项研究的结果表明,对腐败的反向证明的规定始于1971年关于根除腐败犯罪行为的第3号法律,该法律明确将其列入第17条。在其发展过程中,1999年关于根除腐败犯罪行为的第31号法也规定了反证据,即第37条。然而,在反证的制定上的政策并不能反映当时处理贪污犯罪的情况和情况,贪污是一种造成经济损失的特殊犯罪。的国家。2001年颁布的第20号法(修订1999年颁布的第31号法)为消除腐败犯罪提供了比以前更明确的政策方向,即改进反证据的制定。反证制度的这一改变的含义是,在根除腐败的法律中有两种类型的反证制度,即平衡的有限反证和纯粹/完全反证。
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