Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://repositori.uma.ac.id/handle/123456789/12117Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | Mubarak, Ridho | - |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Wahyuni, Windy Sri | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Siregar, Frendy Marcopolo | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-09-10T03:12:32Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2020-09-10T03:12:32Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2020-04-27 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://repositori.uma.ac.id/handle/123456789/12117 | - |
| dc.description | Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 terhadap perbuatan penyidik dalam melakukan penetapan tersangka secara sewenangwenang dapat diajukan permohonan praperadilan sebagaimana yang dimaksud dalam Pasal 1 angka 14 bahwa untuk menetapkan seseorang sebagai tersangka harus berdasarkan bukti permulaan yang cukup. Berdasarkan Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.mdn hakim praperadilan menyatakan penetapan status tersangka terhadap Siwajiraja tidak berdasarkan bukti permulaan yang cukup. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui dasar hakim dalam pertimbangannya telah mengabulkan permohonan Praperadilan Nomor 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn dan untuk mengetahui akibat hukum dari permohonan pemohon yang telah dikabulkan mengenai tidak sahnya penetapan tersangka dalam Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu penelitian hukum normatif dengan sifat penelitian deskriptif analisis. Penelitian ini menggunakan sumber hukum yang terdiri dari sumber hukum primer, sumber hukum sekunder, dan sumber hukum tersier. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian diperoleh bahwa dasar hakim dalam mempertimbangkan permohonan praperadilan pemohon yang mengabulkan tidak sah nya penetapan tersangka dalam Putusan Nomor 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn menyatakan bahwa penetapan tersangka tidak berdasarkan bukti permulaan yang cukup yaitu minimal 2 (dua) alat bukti. Namun, penetapan tersangka terhadap Siwajiraja dapat dilakukan kembali apabila adanya ditemukan minimal 2 (dua) bukti baru sebagaimana yang dimaksud dalam Pasa 2 ayat (3) Perma Nomor 4 Tahun 2016. Akibat hukum dari permohonan pemohon yang telah dikabulkan mengenai tidak sahnya penetapan tersangka dalam Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn adalah pemohon dapat mengajukan permohonan ganti kerugian dan mengajukan permohonan rehabilitasi. Namun, KUHAP tidak memberikan peluang atau tidak membenarkan upaya hukum dalam perkara praperadilan. | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014 regarding the conduct of investigators in arbitrarily determining a suspect, a pretrial application as referred to in Article 1 number 14 can be submitted that to determine a person as a suspect must be based on sufficient preliminary evidence. Based on the Pretrial Decision Number 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn And the pretrial judge stated that the determination of the status of the suspect against Siwajiraja was not based on sufficient preliminary evidence. The purpose of this study is to determine the basis of the judge in his consideration for granting pretrial petition number 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn and to find out the legal consequences of the petition of petitioners who have been granted regarding the illegitimate determination of the suspect in the pretrial ruling number 53/Pid.Pra/2017/ PN.Mdn. The research method used is normative legal research with the nature of descriptive analysis research. This study uses legal sources consisting of primary legal sources, secondary legal sources, and tertiary legal sources. Based on the results of the study it was found that the basis of the judge in considering the petition of pretrial petitioners who granted his invalid the determination of the suspect in Decision Number 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn Proof. However, the determination of the suspect against Siwajiraja can be carried out again if there is found at least 2 (two) new evidence as referred to in Article 2 paragraph (3) of Perma Number 4 of 2016. The legal consequences of the petition of the applicant that has been granted regarding the invalid determination of the suspect in the Decision Pretrial Number 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.Mdn is the applicant can submit a request for compensation and submit a request for rehabilitation. However, the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide opportunities or does not justify legal remedies in pretrial cases. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | id | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Universitas Medan Area | en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | NPM;168400153 | - |
| dc.subject | praperadilan | en_US |
| dc.subject | penetapan tersangka | en_US |
| dc.subject | determination | en_US |
| dc.subject | suspect | en_US |
| dc.title | Pertimbangan Putusan hakim Praperadilan Mengenai Sah Atau Tidaknya Penetapan Tersangka Hukum (Studi Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.MDN) | en_US |
| dc.title.alternative | Pertimbangan Putusan hakim Praperadilan Mengenai Sah Atau Tidaknya Penetapan Tersangka Hukum (Studi Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 53/Pid.Pra/2017/PN.MDN) | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_US |
| Appears in Collections: | SP - Criminal Law | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 168400153 - Frendy Marcopolo Siregar - Chapter IV.pdf Restricted Access | Chapter IV | 367.65 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
| 168400153 - Frendy Marcopolo Siregar - Fulltext.pdf | Cover, Abstract, Chapter I,II,III, Bibliography | 18.93 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.