Juridical Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023 Concerning Judicial Review by the Prosecutor's Office in Criminal Cases in Indonesia

Aldi Yudistira, Umi Rozah
{"title":"Juridical Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023 Concerning Judicial Review by the Prosecutor's Office in Criminal Cases in Indonesia","authors":"Aldi Yudistira, Umi Rozah","doi":"10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i04-30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the practice of criminal justice in Indonesia, judicial review efforts are an interesting problem to study because, in the development phase, there is a tug-of-war of interests between the defendant or his heirs and the public prosecutor. The presence of Constitutional Court Decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023 ends the debate and legal uncertainty for justice seekers. In this research, the author used a normative juridical approach. The approaches used were the Law approach, Case Approach, and Conceptual Approach. There are several problem formulations in this research: 1) what is the rationale for the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023?; 2) What are the arrangements for judicial review after the Constitutional Court decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023. Research Results of problem formulation number 1). According to the Court's consideration, requests for judicial review in criminal cases are the right of the defendant and his heirs, and the addition of the authority of the prosecutor to carry out judicial review efforts does not provide legal certainty and justice. Previously, the court in 2016 decided on a case regarding judicial review efforts, in which the court considered that the essence of a judicial review is the rights of the defendant and his heirs. 2) After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023, the public prosecutor cannot submit a judicial review effort in a criminal case; legally, when the prosecutor makes a judicial review effort in a criminal case, it is invalid/abash. With the decision of the Constitutional Court number 20/PUU-XXI/2023, it is reaffirmed that only the defendant and his heirs can submit a judicial review effort.","PeriodicalId":492883,"journal":{"name":"International journal of social science and human research","volume":" 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of social science and human research","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i04-30","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

In the practice of criminal justice in Indonesia, judicial review efforts are an interesting problem to study because, in the development phase, there is a tug-of-war of interests between the defendant or his heirs and the public prosecutor. The presence of Constitutional Court Decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023 ends the debate and legal uncertainty for justice seekers. In this research, the author used a normative juridical approach. The approaches used were the Law approach, Case Approach, and Conceptual Approach. There are several problem formulations in this research: 1) what is the rationale for the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023?; 2) What are the arrangements for judicial review after the Constitutional Court decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023. Research Results of problem formulation number 1). According to the Court's consideration, requests for judicial review in criminal cases are the right of the defendant and his heirs, and the addition of the authority of the prosecutor to carry out judicial review efforts does not provide legal certainty and justice. Previously, the court in 2016 decided on a case regarding judicial review efforts, in which the court considered that the essence of a judicial review is the rights of the defendant and his heirs. 2) After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 20/PUU-XXI/2023, the public prosecutor cannot submit a judicial review effort in a criminal case; legally, when the prosecutor makes a judicial review effort in a criminal case, it is invalid/abash. With the decision of the Constitutional Court number 20/PUU-XXI/2023, it is reaffirmed that only the defendant and his heirs can submit a judicial review effort.
对宪法法院第 20/PUU-XXI/2023 号决定的法理分析,该决定涉及检察官办公室对印度尼西亚刑事案件的司法审查
在印度尼西亚的刑事司法实践中,司法审查工作是一个值得研究的问题,因为在发展阶段,被告或其继承人与检察官之间存在着利益角力。宪法法院第 20/PUU-XXI/2023 号判决的出现结束了争论,为司法寻求者带来了法律上的不确定性。在本研究中,作者采用了规范法学方法。使用的方法包括法律方法、案例方法和概念方法。本研究有几个问题提法:1)宪法法院第 20/PU-XXI/2023 号判决的依据是什么;2)宪法法院第 20/PU-XXI/2023 号判决后的司法审查安排是什么。问题 1)的研究成果。根据法院的考虑,刑事案件的司法审查请求是被告人及其继承人的权利,增加检察官开展司法审查工作的权限并不能提供法律的确定性和公正性。此前,法院在 2016 年判决了一起关于司法审查工作的案件,法院认为司法审查的本质是被告人及其继承人的权利。2)在宪法法院第 20/PUU-XXI/2023 号判决之后,检察官不能在刑事案件中提出司法审查努力;从法律上讲,当检察官在刑事案件中提出司法审查努力时,该努力是无效/无效的。宪法法院第 20/PU-XXI/2023 号裁决重申,只有被告及其继承人才能提交司法审查申请。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信