首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Social Science >Revenue Of Opening Expenses On Criminal Action Of Corruption (Case Study in IA Jayapura District Court)
【24h】

Revenue Of Opening Expenses On Criminal Action Of Corruption (Case Study in IA Jayapura District Court)

机译:腐败刑事诉讼开放费用的收入(案例研究IA Jayapura地区法院)

获取原文

摘要

The implementation of the burden of proof reversal system in Indonesia has existed since the discussion of the Draft Law (RUU) on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes in 1970. At that time, there was an idea about one pattern of eradicating criminal acts of corruption, namely accepting a system of proof reversal. The burden of reversal proof system is a proof system that deals with criminal procedural law which is very differential in nature with a universal proof system that has been known through negative evidence. This study entitled "Reversing the Load of Evidence Against the Study of Corruption Cases in Class IA Jayapura District Court". The purpose of this study was to find out the application of a system of proof reversal in corruption in the Jayapura District Court and to find out the obstacles faced in implementing a verification reversal system in the Jayapura District Court. The research method in this study uses a type of empirical juridical research law. Based on the research, it is found that the verification of corruption case in the District Court of Class IA Jayapura has not yet implemented a system of reversing the burden of proof as mandated in Law No.31 of 1999 jo Law No.20 of 2001. Implementation of reversal of the burden of proof in practice is still in conflict with the principle of presumption of innocence or the principle of presumption of innocence that has been recognized internationally and is also regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code, there are several Articles contained in Law Number 20 Year 2001 which is contradictory to Law Number 12 Year 2005 on the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, by the exercise or enforcement of burden-proofing systems may result in the misuse of authority by law enforcement officers, neither the implementation nor the reversal of the burden of proof as reversal of the burden of proof is limited. Suggested implementation or implementation of reversal of burden of proof in the District Court Class IA Jayapura and in the implementation of reversal of the burden of proof is required a clear rule on the provision of reversal of the burden of proof by not ignoring the principle of presumption of innocence, the affirmation of the meaning and procedure of reversing the burden of proof.
机译:自1970年讨论关于法律草案(ruu)的讨论以来,在1970年讨论了对腐败犯罪的讨论以来,实施了印度尼西亚的证据逆转制度的负担。当时,有一个关于消除犯罪腐败行为的一种模式的想法,即接受证明逆转系统。逆转证明系统的负担是涉及刑事诉讼法的证据制度,其本质上是非常差异的,具有通过负证据所知的普遍证明系统。本研究题为“扭转了逆行腐败腐败案件级别腐败案例的腐败案件的载荷”。本研究的目的是了解腐败腐败的腐败系统,并找出在Jayapura地区法院实施核查逆转系统所面临的障碍。该研究的研究方法采用了一种经验的司法研究法。基于该研究,发现IA Jayapura级别法院核实腐败案例尚未实施扭转1999年第299截至2001年第20章第31号法律规定的证据负担的制度。在实践中的证据负担的情况下,违反纯真的原则仍然发生冲突,或者在国际上承认的纯真的原则,也在刑事诉讼法中受到监管,有几篇包含的条款2001年20年的法律第20辑是2005年第12岁的法律矛盾,就批准了国际公民权利和政治权利国际公约,通过行使或执行负担的制定制度可能导致执法人员滥用权威,既不是作为逆转证据逆转的证据责任的实施也是有限的。建议的实施或实施地区法院级别的证据责任的逆转,并在执行逆转的证据负担中,需要明确规定提供证据责任的逆转,而不是忽视推定原则纯真,肯定了逆转证据负担的意义和程序。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号