PENGARUH PENCATUMAN PERBEDAAN PENDAPAT MAJELIS HAKIM DALAM PUTUSAN PERKARA PIDANA

Pakapahan, Pardamean J A B (2007) PENGARUH PENCATUMAN PERBEDAAN PENDAPAT MAJELIS HAKIM DALAM PUTUSAN PERKARA PIDANA. S1 thesis, UAJY.

Preview	Text (Halaman Judul) 0HK06978.pdf Download (185kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (Bab I) 1HK06978.pdf Download (139kB) | Preview
	Text (Bab II) 2HK06978.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (428kB)
Preview	Text (Bab III) 3HK06978.pdf Download (68kB) | Preview

Abstract

An inclusion of a dissenting opinion in a verdict would be a new thing in Indonesian Law System which inclines into Continental European System. Problematic raised on the implementation. Article 19 point (5) obviously regulate that a dissenting opinion obliged to be embodied on the verdict. The word obliged would be meant to be implemented when dissenting opinon raised between judges. In fact, dissenting opinion only being noted by the head of the court on a separate note. People would not be able to know how each judge consideration towards the case if people could not access the verdict and the dissenting opinion were not being inclusion on the verdict. Refer to the problem. This research were intended to find out why not all of the dissenting opinion were being inclusion and how the inclusion of dissenting opinion on a verdict could effected the Indonesians criminal system. This research using the normative system, means by using books as the source of the information, and interviewing the Yogyakarta District Courts judges. Conclusion could be obtained as a result from this research would be compulsion of the dissenting opinion to be embodied with clear consequences of Law. The expectancy from the inclusion of the dissenting opinion is not only a correction to the verdict but also as a mechanism control for the judges in order to the Law Enforcement.

Actions (login required)

View Item