首页> 外文OA文献 >THE IMPLICATIONS OF EXPANDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE PRETRIAL POST-VERDICT JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT IN DECIDING WHETHER IT IS A VALID DETERMINATION OF THE SUSPECT AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE SUSPECT
【2h】

THE IMPLICATIONS OF EXPANDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE PRETRIAL POST-VERDICT JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT IN DECIDING WHETHER IT IS A VALID DETERMINATION OF THE SUSPECT AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE SUSPECT

机译:扩大审前判决权威司法审查权威的影响决定是否是对执法嫌疑人的有效确定和保护嫌疑人的权利

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The purpose of this study is to determine whether there are implications of expanding the authority of the pretrial post-verdict judicial review of Constitutional Court in deciding whether it is a valid determination of the suspect against law enforcement and the protection of the rights of the suspect. This research belongs to normative research. The results of this study explain that the interpretation method used in pretrial decision  No:04/Pid.Prap/2015/PN.Jak.Sel is the method of discovery of analogy interpretation law (argumentum per analogiam) is wrong, while the legal interpretation method used in the judicial review judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 21 / PUU-XII / 2014 is the historical interpretation method (historiche intepretatie) the problem namely, the Constitutional Court has exceeded its original function that is negative legislator became positive legislators form or add a new norm. So that raises the problem that is contrary to the principles of the criminal justice system that is the principle of quick and simple and low budget justice and the principle of litis finiri oportet also inhibits the process of law enforcement settlement.
机译:本研究的目的是判断是否有扩大审前判决权威辩论司法审查的权威,决定是否是对执法嫌疑人的有效决定和保护嫌疑人的权利。本研究属于规范研究。本研究的结果说明了审前决定的解释方法:04 / PID.PRAP / 2015 / PN.jak.sel是关于类比解释法的方法(每类比的Aricaliam)是错误的,而法律解释在印度尼西亚共和国的宪法法院司法审查的方法21 / Puu-xii / 2014是历史解释方法(Historiche Intepetatie)问题即,宪法法院已超过其原始职能是负面立法者积极的立法者形式或添加新常态。因此,提出了与刑事司法系统原则相反的问题,这是快速而简单,低预算正义的原则,敏尼菌·塞里吉·奥尔泰特的原则也抑制了执法解决方案的过程。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
代理获取

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