Agustri, Wival
Unknown Affiliation

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

Implikasi Hukum Terhadap Terdakwa Yang Tidak Didampingi Penasihat Hukum Berdasarkan Pasal 56 Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 Pada Putusan Sela Nomor 143/Pid.Sus/2019/Pn Yyk Anzar, Anzar; Agustri, Wival
Journal of Lex Theory (JLT) Vol. 4 No. 2 (2023): Journal of Lex Theory (JLT)
Publisher : Program Pascasarjana Universitas Muslim Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52103/jlt.v4i2.1571

Abstract

Tujuan penelitian menganalisis implikasi hukum terhadap tersangka/terdakwa yang tidak didampingi penasihat hukum berdasarkan Pasal 56 KUHAP ayat (1) pada Putusan Sela Nomor 143/PID.SUS/2019/PN YYK juncto Putusan Nomor 72/PID.SUS/2019/PT YYK serta kaitannya dengan ne bis in idem; (2) untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis sanksi terhadap penyidik yang tidak memberikan penasihat hukum bagi tersangka sebagaimana termuat dalam Putusan Sela Nomor 143/PID.SUS/2019/PN YYK Juncto Putusan Nomor 72/PID.SUS/2019/PT YYK. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa : (1) surat dakwaan tidak sah dan penyidik melakukan perbuatan melanggar hukum. Berdasarkan pasal 76 KUHP Perkara ini tidak melekat asas ne bis in idem; (2) penyidik kepolisian melakukan pelanggaran kode etik berdasarkan pasal 10 ayat (1) huruf a angka 1 juncto Pasal 10 Ayat (2) huruf a dan huruf g Peraturan Kepolsian Nomor 7 Tahun 2022 dan dapat dikenakan sanksi berupa sanksi etika atau sanksi administratif berdasarkan pasal 107 huruf a dan b, pasal 108 ayat (1) huruf a, b, c, dan pasal 109 huruf a, b, c, d, dan e Peraturan Kepolisian Nomor 7 Tahun 2022. The research objective is to analyze the legal implications for suspects/defendants who are not accompanied by legal counsel based on Article 56 of the Criminal Procedure Code paragraph (1) in Interim Decision Number 143/PID.SUS/2019/PN YYK in conjunction with Decision Number 72/PID.SUS/2019/PT YYK and relation to ne bis in idem; (2) to find out and analyze sanctions against investigators who do not provide legal advice to suspects as contained in Interim Decision Number 143/PID.SUS/2019/PN YYK Juncto Decision Number 72/PID.SUS/2019/PT YYK. The results of this research show that: (1) the indictment is invalid and the investigator committed an unlawful act. Based on Article 76 of the Criminal Code, this case does not adhere to the principle of ne bis in idem; (2) Police investigators violate the code of ethics based on Article 10 paragraph (1) letter a number 1 in conjunction with Article 10 Paragraph (2) letters a and letter g Police Regulation Number 7 of 2022 and may be subject to sanctions in the form of ethical sanctions or administrative sanctions based on article 107 letters a and b, article 108 paragraph (1) letters a, b, c, and article 109 letters a, b, c, d, and e Police Regulation Number 7 of 2022.