基于正义价值的清廉委腐败犯罪侦查窃听权的法律重构

Aryas Adi Suyanto, Mahmutarom Mahmutarom, Anis Mashdurohatun
{"title":"基于正义价值的清廉委腐败犯罪侦查窃听权的法律重构","authors":"Aryas Adi Suyanto, Mahmutarom Mahmutarom, Anis Mashdurohatun","doi":"10.36348/sijlcj.2023.v06i09.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to analyze the weaknesses and reconstruct regulations on the Authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission in Wiretapping Corruption Crimes which have not been fair so far because the regulation regarding wiretapping authority is still sectoral in nature and there is no specific law on wiretapping using the constructivism paradigm, the type of research in the form of non-doctrinal law, and a juridical-empirical approach. The results of this study show that the weaknesses in terms of legal culture include evidence used in criminal proof that is still limited to the Criminal Procedure Code and the law enforcement culture in Indonesia is still positivist in nature. The phrase \"accountable to the supervisory board\" in Article 12C paragraph (2) of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law) is not based on Pancasila values of justice and does not have binding legal force. Therefore, a legal reconstruction is needed by strengthening the authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission to carry out wiretapping to prevent and eradicate criminal acts of corruption through the reconstruction of Article 12C in particular Article 12C paragraph (2) of Law Number 19 of 2019 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2002 concerning The Corruption Eradication Commission stated that \"Wiretapping which has been completed must be accounted for to the Leaders of the Corruption Eradication Commission and notified to the Supervisory Board no later than 14 (fourteen) working days after the Wiretapping was completed\".","PeriodicalId":499336,"journal":{"name":"Scholars international journal of law, crime and justice","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legal Reconstruction of the Authority of Tapping by the Corruption Eradication Commission in Corruption Crime Investigation Based on Justice Value\",\"authors\":\"Aryas Adi Suyanto, Mahmutarom Mahmutarom, Anis Mashdurohatun\",\"doi\":\"10.36348/sijlcj.2023.v06i09.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to analyze the weaknesses and reconstruct regulations on the Authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission in Wiretapping Corruption Crimes which have not been fair so far because the regulation regarding wiretapping authority is still sectoral in nature and there is no specific law on wiretapping using the constructivism paradigm, the type of research in the form of non-doctrinal law, and a juridical-empirical approach. The results of this study show that the weaknesses in terms of legal culture include evidence used in criminal proof that is still limited to the Criminal Procedure Code and the law enforcement culture in Indonesia is still positivist in nature. The phrase \\\"accountable to the supervisory board\\\" in Article 12C paragraph (2) of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law) is not based on Pancasila values of justice and does not have binding legal force. Therefore, a legal reconstruction is needed by strengthening the authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission to carry out wiretapping to prevent and eradicate criminal acts of corruption through the reconstruction of Article 12C in particular Article 12C paragraph (2) of Law Number 19 of 2019 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2002 concerning The Corruption Eradication Commission stated that \\\"Wiretapping which has been completed must be accounted for to the Leaders of the Corruption Eradication Commission and notified to the Supervisory Board no later than 14 (fourteen) working days after the Wiretapping was completed\\\".\",\"PeriodicalId\":499336,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scholars international journal of law, crime and justice\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scholars international journal of law, crime and justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36348/sijlcj.2023.v06i09.002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scholars international journal of law, crime and justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36348/sijlcj.2023.v06i09.002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在运用建构主义范式、非理论法研究类型和司法实证方法,分析目前因窃听权力管制仍属行业性质,且没有具体的窃听法律而不公平的铲除腐败委员会权力管制的不足,并对其进行重构。本研究的结果表明,在法律文化方面的弱点包括用于刑事证明的证据仍然局限于刑事诉讼法,印度尼西亚的执法文化仍然是实证主义的。《肃贪委员会法》第12C条第(2)款中的“对监事会负责”一词并非基于潘卡西拉的正义价值观,也不具有法律约束力。因此,为了预防和根除腐败犯罪行为,需要对《2019年第19号法》第12C条进行法律重构,特别是《关于消除腐败委员会的2002年第30号法的修正案》第12C条第2款进行法律重构,加强消除腐败委员会进行窃听的权力,其中规定:“已完成的窃听必须向腐败领导人负责。并在窃听完成后不迟于14(14)个工作日通知监事会”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Legal Reconstruction of the Authority of Tapping by the Corruption Eradication Commission in Corruption Crime Investigation Based on Justice Value
This study aims to analyze the weaknesses and reconstruct regulations on the Authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission in Wiretapping Corruption Crimes which have not been fair so far because the regulation regarding wiretapping authority is still sectoral in nature and there is no specific law on wiretapping using the constructivism paradigm, the type of research in the form of non-doctrinal law, and a juridical-empirical approach. The results of this study show that the weaknesses in terms of legal culture include evidence used in criminal proof that is still limited to the Criminal Procedure Code and the law enforcement culture in Indonesia is still positivist in nature. The phrase "accountable to the supervisory board" in Article 12C paragraph (2) of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law) is not based on Pancasila values of justice and does not have binding legal force. Therefore, a legal reconstruction is needed by strengthening the authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission to carry out wiretapping to prevent and eradicate criminal acts of corruption through the reconstruction of Article 12C in particular Article 12C paragraph (2) of Law Number 19 of 2019 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2002 concerning The Corruption Eradication Commission stated that "Wiretapping which has been completed must be accounted for to the Leaders of the Corruption Eradication Commission and notified to the Supervisory Board no later than 14 (fourteen) working days after the Wiretapping was completed".
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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