The Urgence Of The Control Mechanism Of Authority The Prosecutor General In Waiting The Case For Public Interest (Seponeering)

Authors

  • Apriyanto NUSA Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia
  • I Nyoman NURJAYA Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia
  • Abdul MADJID Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia
  • Bambang SUGIRI Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38142/ijesss.v3i2.294

Keywords:

Control, Attorney General, Seponeering

Abstract

The urgency of the control mechanism over the Attorney General's authority in overriding cases in the public interest (seponeering) is a manifestation of obtaining protection of human rights for every citizen who is harmed by the issuance of seponeering by the Attorney General. Apart from these reasons, the importance of controlling the authority of the Attorney General is also to create the principles of justice and legal certainty. Legal practices that often occur in the judicial process show stagnation in realizing these three things, both the protection of human rights (HAM), justice and legal certainty. Whereas the spirit of forming the Criminal Procedure Code which was promulgated based on Law Number 8 of 1981 laid the basic foundation for the protection of human rights (HAM) as the main goal, which includes upholding justice and legal certainty. There is stagnation in the effort to control the seponeering issued by the Attorney General, because there are juridical limitations in the pretrial object institution as stated in the Elucidation of Article 77 of Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code which states that: with "discontinuation of prosecution" does not include setting aside cases for the public interest which are the authority of the Attorney General.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aburaera, S., Muhadar, Maskun. (2010). Filsafat Hukum dan Rekonstruksi Sabda Manusia dan Pengetahuan Hingga Keadilan dan Kebenaran. Makassar: Pustaka Refleksi.

Ariska, D.I. (2013). Yurisdiksi Asas Oportunitas Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Yogyakarta: Deepublish.

Basri, M. (2018). Hakikat Tuntutn Ganti Rugi pada Perkara Pidana, Disertasi pada Fakultas Hukum. Universitas Hasanuddin.

Effendi, M. (1994). Dimensi dan Dinamika Hak Asasi Manusia dalam Hukum Nasional dan Internasional. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Hadjon, P.M. (2010). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Rakyat Indonesia. Surabaya: Bina Ilmu.

Indarti, M.F. (2007). Ilmu Perundang-Undangan Jenis fungsi dan Materi Muatan. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Mahfud M.D. (2001). Demokrasi dan Konstitusi di Indonesia Studi tentang Interaksi Politik dan Kehidupan Ketatanegaraan. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta.

Mertokusumo, S. (2008). Mengenal Hukum Suatu Pengantar. Yogyakarta: Liberty.

Muhtai, M.E. (2013). Dimensi-dimensi HAM: Mengurai Hak Ekonomi, Sosial dan Budaya. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.

Rachel, J. (2004). Filasafat Moral, Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Rahardjo, S. (2008). Biarkan Hukum Mengalir Catatan Kritis tentang Pergulatan Manusia dan Hukum. Jakarta: Kompas Media Nusantara.

Ridwan H.R. (2014). Hukum Administrasi Negara. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.

Wijaya, H. (1980). Seri Sejarah Filsafat Barat 2. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Downloads

Published

2022-07-31

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2022): International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Science (July – October 2022)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Apriyanto NUSA, I Nyoman NURJAYA, Abdul MADJID, Bambang SUGIRI

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Most read articles by the same author(s)