Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

TINJAUAN YURIDIS ASIMILASI PADA LEMBAGA PEMASYARAKATAN TERBUKA (Studi di Lapas Terbuka Kelas IIB Mataram) Kusuma, Jauhari Dwi
Jurnal Muhakkamah Vol 4 No 2 (2019): Jurnal Muhakkamah
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Nahdlatul Wathan Mataram

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

One of the places inmates undergo assimilation is by being placed in the open prison. Placement of Prisoners in Open Prison must meet certain requirements other than those generally regulated in Government Regulation Number 32 of 1999 Concerning the Terms and Procedures for the Implementation of Prisoners' Rights as last amended by Government Regulation Number 99 of 2012 there are also special arrangements in Circular Director General of Corrections Number E.PK.04.10-115 and Number PAS-PK.01.01.02-100 regarding the placement of prisoners to the Open Penitentiary Institution / Agricultural Camp. From the results of the analysis of these laws and regulations the obstacles to the placement of Prisoners in Open Prison are as follows: 1) The assimilation requirements in the form of Community Research (LITMAS) are a long process due to the limitations of the Community Guidance Officer, 2) Procedurally the process is long; 3) The location of the Lapas Lapas is far from the prisoner's house; 4) Appropriate assessment process according to criteria is very difficult. For the implementation of Assimilation in the Mataram Open Prison, in practice it is in accordance with the Decree of the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Indonesia NO.M.02-PK.04.10 of 1990 concerning the Pattern of Prisoners / Detainees in the form of 2 fields, namely the Development of Personality and Independence.
TANGGUNG JAWAB KEPOLISIAN DALAM PENGAMANAN BENDA SITAAN SEBAGAI BARANG BUKTI DALAM PENYIDIKAN PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA (STUDI KASUS DI POLRESTA MATARAM) B.Farhana Kurnia Lestari; Jauhari Dewi Kusuma; Gatot Pramedi
Jurnal Ilmiah Hospitality Vol 11 No 2: Desember 2022 (in Press)
Publisher : Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Mataram

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47492/jih.v11i2.2340

Abstract

The confiscation of evidence or confiscation is carried out by law enforcement officers for the level of examination, especially for investigation purposes in terms of sufficient evidence, and Responsibility as law enforcement officers in securing confiscated objects. Investigators cannot arbitrarily seize goods without following the rules outlined by laws and regulations. They must comply with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code because this is closely related to the dignity of a person guaranteed by the State, government, law, and every citizen as values. HAM. The purpose of this research is to find out the form of Responsibility of investigators for the evidence confiscated at the Mataram Police and what obstacles are faced by the police in securing confiscated objects as evidence in the investigation of criminal cases at the Mataram Police. This research is empirical legal research, which is legal research conducted by collecting data from primary data or data obtained directly, either through observation or direct interviews. The type of approach used is the statutory approach, the conceptual analysis approach, and the case approach. Legal materials are processed deductively, drawing conclusions from a general problem to a specific one. The results of the study show Responsibility In handling confiscated objects by investigators, the investigators are fully responsible for the seized evidence and are prohibited from being used by anyone sanctions investigators who misuse evidence can be subject to disciplinary punishment in the form of a written warning; delay in attending education for a maximum of 1 (one) year; postponement of periodic salary increases; maximum promotion delay 1 (one year; emotional mutations; release from office; placement in a special place for a maximum of 21 (twenty-one) days. The investigator is fully responsible for confiscating evidence and prohibited from being used by anyone. The sanction for the investigator who misuses the evidence may be subject to disciplinary punishment in the form of a written warning; delay in attending education for a maximum of 1 (one) year; postponement of periodic salary increases; postponement of promotion for a maximum of 1 (one) year; emotional mutations; release from office; placement in a special place for a maximum of 21 (twenty-one) days. Coordination to determine the proper storage place for confiscated objects. Small-sized items will be stored in the sub locker. Mataram City Police evidence unit. The obstacles faced in the storage of evidence are the absence of adequate unique and permanent facilities in the form of a room or warehouse that can use for storage of evidence at the Mataram City Police, the lack of maximum supervision of the evidence, either from investigators or from other existing personnel. At the Mataram City Police, individuals still use evidence for personal gain.
KEBIJAKAN FORMULASI PIDANA MATI DALAM PEMBARUAN KITAB UNDANG-UNDANG HUKUM PIDANA NASIONAL B. FARHANA KURNIA LESTARI; JAUHARI D. KUSUMA; JURWAEIS MARJA SEKA
GANEC SWARA Vol 18, No 2 (2024): Juni 2024
Publisher : Universitas Mahasaraswati K. Mataram

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35327/gara.v18i2.884

Abstract

This study aims to determine the comparison of death penalty sanctions in the 2023 Criminal Code Update and the old Criminal Code that is still in force today and also to determine the legal certainty of death penalty legal certainty in the National Criminal Code Update. The research method used in this study is a normative legal research method which is legal research conducted using a statutory approach and and analysis of legal concepts by analyzing criminal and penal concepts and applicable laws and regulations in Indonesia related to this research.From the results of the study, that the comparison of death penalty sanctions in the renewal of the old Criminal Code and the new Criminal Code, namely the old Criminal Code, the death penalty is regulated in article 10 which explains that the death penalty is the main crime and is the highest criminal sanction. Meanwhile, in the new Criminal Code, the death penalty is no longer included in the main crime and changes to an alternative crime with the provision of probation for 10 (sepulu) years. If the death row prisoner shows commendable attitudes and actions, the death penalty can be changed to life imprisonment by Presidential Decree after obtaining the consideration of the Supreme Court. Legal certainty The renewal of the death penalty in Indonesian criminal law can be achieved by referring to Indonesian laws and regulations governing the death penalty. In the new Criminal Code, provisions on the death penalty are regulated in article 98, article 99, article 100 paragraph (1), paragraph (2), paragraph (3), paragraph (4), article 101 and article 102. This article regulates the formulation of the death penalty in the Criminal Code Reform which is threatened alternatively as a last resort to prevent the commission of criminal acts and protect the community.