TINJAUAN YURIDIS NORMATIF DUALISME KETENTUAN TENTANG KEKUATAN PEMBUKTIAN KETERANGAN SAKSI TERHADAP SAKSI YANG TIDAK HADIR DI PERSIDANGAN DALAM PERSPEKTIF UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 8 TAHUN 1981 TENTANG KUHAP DAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 13TAHUN 2006 TENTANG PERLINDUNGAN SAKSI DAN KORBAN

FANDI SUHONO, AKHMAD (2007) TINJAUAN YURIDIS NORMATIF DUALISME KETENTUAN TENTANG KEKUATAN PEMBUKTIAN KETERANGAN SAKSI TERHADAP SAKSI YANG TIDAK HADIR DI PERSIDANGAN DALAM PERSPEKTIF UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 8 TAHUN 1981 TENTANG KUHAP DAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 13TAHUN 2006 TENTANG PERLINDUNGAN SAKSI DAN KORBAN. Other thesis, University of Muhammadiyah Malang.

[img]
Preview
Text
TINJAUAN_YURIDIS_NORMATIF_DUALISME.pdf

Download (93kB) | Preview

Abstract

This research object leaves from a rule related to presence of eyewitness in which conference in one sides like the one has been arranged in rules Number Rules 8 the year 1981 About KUHAP its(the eyewitness in giving description as a means of valid evidence is obliged by present in conference, while side to be other based on rules and regulations Number 13 The year 2006 about protection witness and Victim its eyewitness when giving description to earn without having to present in conference that is then both Rules - Above mentioned rules creates a dualism or contradiction. On that account, problem formula taken by writer is why happened rule dualism about presence in conference in perspective of Rules - Number Inventor 8 The year 1981 About KUHAP and Rules - Number Rules 13 The year 2006 About Protection of Eyewitness and Victim and second is how verification strength of description of eyewitness to absent eyewitness in conference in perspective of Rules - Number Rules 8 The year 1981 About KUHAP and Rules - Number Rules 13 The year 2006 About Protection of Eyewitness and Victim. Approach method applied by writer to answer above mentioned problems is by using method Yuridis normative, that is analyzing to rules invitation applied in public, especially rules Number 8 The year 1981 About KUHAP and Rules - Number Rules 13 The year 2006 About Protection of Eyewitness and Victim, and approach to ground or doctrine or opinion of the masters gotten from literature as basis supporter in the relation with matter studied. Based on research result done by writer, then writer can conclude that with existence of presence dualism of eyewitness in conference which has been arranged in 2 ( two) Rules-Rules Namely Number Code/Law 8 The year 1981 About KUHAP and Rules - Number Rules 13 The year 2006 About Protection of Eyewitness and Victim, hence can apply ground invitation-invitation that rule Rules - Rules which more special ( Rules - Number Rules 13 The year 2006 About Protection of Eyewitness and Victim) can overrule Rules - Rules which more public ( Number Code/Law 8 The year 1981 About KUHAP). And with existence of the dualism, hence ought to be returned to confidence of judge investigating the case does the eyewitness obliged present or not in conference to give description or witness, because both rules have each excess and weakness. Besides also inferential that absent eyewitness in conference to give description or witness is really is not equipment of evidence and only can be made equipment of valid evidence if there is concord by means of ... validity evidence other is note of that equipment of the other validity evidence is minimum there are 2 ( two) kinds of equipment of evidence. Or description of eyewitness given without eyewitness must present in conference, hence description of the eyewitness can be made equipment of guide evidence. While about its(the verification strength, that description of eyewitness given with present in conference has valid verification strength and ties, while description of absent eyewitness in conference has free verification strength, doesn't determine, and free judge to utilize in proving defendant mistake, because altogether returns to confidence of judge investigating the case, Suggestion given writer is that in meeting hall is given by special room to eyewitness staying in threat in order not to be known public and only ceremony of judge which is entitled and authorized to know it,. Besides also, judge shall must do law breakthrough that is in giving protection of eyewitness ( related to its(the presence in conference) without having to best awaiting decision of The Institute of Protection of Eyewitness and Victim ( LPSK) and enough only with police report that eyewitness had been menaced. Keyword: Dualisms, presence eyewitness in conference, Verification strength.

Item Type: Thesis (Other)
Subjects: K Law > K Law (General)
Divisions: Faculty of Law > Department of Law
Depositing User: Zainul Afandi
Date Deposited: 29 May 2012 03:53
Last Modified: 29 May 2012 03:53
URI: http://eprints.umm.ac.id/id/eprint/6073

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item