Pembatalan Kewenangan Dewan Pengawas Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi Dalam Hal Pemberian Izin Penyadapan, Penggeledahan Dan Penyitaan Pada Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 70/ PUU-XVII/2019 Dalam Perspektif Efektifitas Hukum

IF 0.4 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research Pub Date : 2022-10-04 DOI:10.15408/jlr.v4i5.23047
Sony Aldianto, B. Burhanudin, Tresia Elda
{"title":"Pembatalan Kewenangan Dewan Pengawas Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi Dalam Hal Pemberian Izin Penyadapan, Penggeledahan Dan Penyitaan Pada Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 70/ PUU-XVII/2019 Dalam Perspektif Efektifitas Hukum","authors":"Sony Aldianto, B. Burhanudin, Tresia Elda","doi":"10.15408/jlr.v4i5.23047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main problem in this study is that, the position of the Supervisory Board of the Corruption Eradication Commission after the authority in granting wiretapping, search and seizure permits was canceled by the Constitutional Court in the perspective of the effectiveness of the law and the criminal justice system. This study aims to make everyone understand the position and urgency of the KPK Supervisory Board after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 70/PUU-XVII/2019 in the concept of legal effectiveness and the criminal justice system in Indonesia. The results of this study indicate that regarding the judge's considerations, that the Supervisory Board of the Corruption Eradication commission in granting wiretapping, search and confiscation permits is a real form of overlapping authority of pro justitia.  The KPK Supervisory Board is not a law enforcement officer, so it is not in accordance with the effectiveness of the law in terms of law enforcement factors, community factors and legal factors, therefore is not included in the components of the criminal justice system and violates the concept of the criminal justice system.","PeriodicalId":40374,"journal":{"name":"ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15408/jlr.v4i5.23047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The main problem in this study is that, the position of the Supervisory Board of the Corruption Eradication Commission after the authority in granting wiretapping, search and seizure permits was canceled by the Constitutional Court in the perspective of the effectiveness of the law and the criminal justice system. This study aims to make everyone understand the position and urgency of the KPK Supervisory Board after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 70/PUU-XVII/2019 in the concept of legal effectiveness and the criminal justice system in Indonesia. The results of this study indicate that regarding the judge's considerations, that the Supervisory Board of the Corruption Eradication commission in granting wiretapping, search and confiscation permits is a real form of overlapping authority of pro justitia.  The KPK Supervisory Board is not a law enforcement officer, so it is not in accordance with the effectiveness of the law in terms of law enforcement factors, community factors and legal factors, therefore is not included in the components of the criminal justice system and violates the concept of the criminal justice system.
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
从法律有效的角度来看,根除腐败委员会监督委员会在裁决宪法第70号/ puuxvii /2019号上取消了对窃听、搜查和扣押的授权
本研究的主要问题是,从法律效力和刑事司法制度的角度来看,宪法法院取消了清廉委员会监事会在授予窃听、搜查、扣押许可后的地位。本研究旨在让大家了解印尼宪法法院第70/PUU-XVII/2019号判决后肃贪委监事会在法律效力概念和刑事司法制度中的地位和紧迫性。这项研究的结果表明,关于法官的考虑,根除腐败委员会监事会在授予窃听、搜查和没收许可证方面是一种真正形式的司法权力重叠。KPK监事会不是执法人员,因此在执法因素、社区因素和法律因素方面都不符合法律的有效性,因此不被纳入刑事司法制度的组成部分,违反了刑事司法制度的概念。
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊最新文献
Fill in the Blank? A Discussion of Prefilled Tax Returns in the U.S. Does Notice 2014-21 Need an Update? An Analysis of Potential Tax Classifications for Cryptocurrency Covers and Front Matter Editorial Policy Pathology of The Legal Gap in the Tax Collection and Payment Stage (A Comparative Study of The IRS and The United States)
×
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