Alternatives For Providing Compensation For The Detention Of A Defendant Whose Case Is Acquitted

A. Akbar
{"title":"Alternatives For Providing Compensation For The Detention Of A Defendant Whose Case Is Acquitted","authors":"A. Akbar","doi":"10.25041/plr.v3i2.2733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pretrial is still a paradox that creates uncertainty in compensating defendants who are acquitted and have permanent legal force. Pretrial is one way to enforce true justice, to enforce law, and truth through horizontal means as regulated in Article 80 of the Criminal Procedure Code to show the essence of pretrial as a form of supervision of coercive measures that have been carried out by investigators and public prosecutors against suspects. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the policy of criminal law regarding the alternative of providing compensation other than through pretrial. This research uses a normative juridical approach and a sociological juridical approach. The data used in this study are secondary data and primary data and use library research and interview instruments. So to the results of this study, there are 2 (two) alternatives for providing compensation for the detention of the defendant whose case was acquitted and had permanent legal force. First, compensation is included in the court decision in case of a loss due to a criminal act. Second, compensation can be made through an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) with a court order. The legal implication when a judge provides compensation for the detention rights of a defendant whose case is acquitted and has permanent legal force is that the state must fulfill its obligation to pay compensation to the defendant. However, if the claim for compensation is rejected, it will result in losses from the accused's social, economic, and human rights aspects.","PeriodicalId":52575,"journal":{"name":"Pancasila and Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pancasila and Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25041/plr.v3i2.2733","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Pretrial is still a paradox that creates uncertainty in compensating defendants who are acquitted and have permanent legal force. Pretrial is one way to enforce true justice, to enforce law, and truth through horizontal means as regulated in Article 80 of the Criminal Procedure Code to show the essence of pretrial as a form of supervision of coercive measures that have been carried out by investigators and public prosecutors against suspects. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the policy of criminal law regarding the alternative of providing compensation other than through pretrial. This research uses a normative juridical approach and a sociological juridical approach. The data used in this study are secondary data and primary data and use library research and interview instruments. So to the results of this study, there are 2 (two) alternatives for providing compensation for the detention of the defendant whose case was acquitted and had permanent legal force. First, compensation is included in the court decision in case of a loss due to a criminal act. Second, compensation can be made through an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) with a court order. The legal implication when a judge provides compensation for the detention rights of a defendant whose case is acquitted and has permanent legal force is that the state must fulfill its obligation to pay compensation to the defendant. However, if the claim for compensation is rejected, it will result in losses from the accused's social, economic, and human rights aspects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为无罪被告的拘留提供赔偿的替代方案
审前审判仍然是一个悖论,它在补偿被无罪释放并具有永久法律效力的被告方面造成了不确定性。预审是通过《刑事诉讼法》第80条规定的横向手段实现真正正义、执法和真相的一种方式,以显示预审的本质,作为对调查人员和检察官对嫌疑人采取的强制措施的监督形式。因此,本研究旨在分析刑法关于通过审前以外的其他方式提供赔偿的政策。本研究采用规范司法方法和社会学司法方法。本研究中使用的数据是二次数据和一次数据,并使用图书馆研究和访谈工具。因此,根据这项研究的结果,有两(两)种替代方案可以为被告的拘留提供赔偿,被告的案件被判无罪并具有永久法律效力。首先,在因犯罪行为造成损失的情况下,法院判决中包括赔偿。其次,可以通过法院命令的替代争议解决(ADR)进行赔偿。当法官为案件被无罪释放并具有永久法律效力的被告的拘留权提供赔偿时,法律含义是国家必须履行向被告支付赔偿的义务。然而,如果索赔被驳回,将导致被告在社会、经济和人权方面的损失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Reflecting Pancasila in Environmental Crimes Enforcement: Diffusing Values to Indonesia’s Laws Re-evaluating the Legal and Institutional Complications Affecting the Protection of Women's Rights in Cameroon: The Need to Remedying the Odds Equity Crowdfunding: The Secondary Market’s Implementation and Legal Protection for Investors Using Technology-Based Crowdfunding Global Minimum Tax Implementation: Vietnam's Policy Recommendations Rethinking The Feasibility of Pancasila as a Scientific Paradigm
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1