CD Skripsi

Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 34/Puu-Xi/2013 Tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 08 Tahun 1981Tentang Hukum Acara Pidana Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945

---

Legal effort represent rights which under the aegis of law, aim to look for justice and truth. That legal effort cover [at] justice of first storey;level, compare, Sighting and kasasi Return to Appellate Court. Decision of MK Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 which is requested Antasari Azhar relate to justice principle, where with existence of Section 268 sentence ( 3) the KUHAP have handcuffed the right to look for justice to searcher of justice. With existence of decision of MK Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 bearing phenomenon how rule of law guarantee of the parties, in case of Antasari pertinent Azhar have have raised Sighting Return to Appellate Court and Appellate Court decide to refuse Sighting Return that, appellate court decision Ought To have had the character of final, but with existence of the Lawcourt Constitution decision generate problem where rule of law situation of Sighting Return.
Target of this research, to know base consideration of judge of MK in judging the case of Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 and to know decision bearing taken by MK to rule of law principle and also to know follow-up of decision of MK Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 to jurisdiction in Indonesia.
This research by using approach of normatif that is principle of justices, data type in this research [is] by using materials punish primary that is UUD 1945, materials punish sekunder ( books related to result of data and research of internet) and tertiary law materials), data collecting technique in this research bibliography study and data analysis use deductive method that is analysing problems of form to special form.
Result of research [is]: First, base consideration of MK in judging the case of number 34/PUU-XI/2013 [is] pursuant to sense of justice and Human right. Both, decision bearing of MK number 34/PUU-XI/2013 to rule of law principle [is] with existence of decision of MK the [do] not result to turn tail rule of law him. Third, follow-up of decision of MK Number 34/PUU-XI/2013 [is] making of technical order [regarding/ hit] proffering of new evidence ( novum) as well as grace period proffering of Sighting legal effort Return require to be made a[n clear regulasi. Writer suggestion, First, to pembentuk of amandemen to sections exist in in KUHAP which have been review judicial by MK, to pembentuk of shall make a[n clear regulasi [regarding/ hit] new evidence ( novum) which like what can be raised Sighting Return more than the once is. Third, proffering of Sighting legal effort Return shall need to be specified demarcation and given grace period rule of law creation, benefit and justice
Keyword : Analyse Yuridis - Decision Lawcourt Constitution - KUHAP

---

Ketersediaan

Informasi Detail

Judul Seri

-

No. Panggil

09 03. 115 (0001)

Penerbit

Pekanbaru : Universitas Riau - Fakultas Hukum - Hukum Tata Negara., 2015

Deskripsi Fisik

vi, 113 hlm,;ill,; 29 cm

Bahasa

Indonesia

ISBN/ISSN

-

Klasifikasi

09 03. 115 (0001)

Tipe Isi

-

Tipe Media

-

Tipe Pembawa

-

Edisi

-

Subjek

-

Info Detail Spesifik

-

Pernyataan Tanggungjawab

DAUS

Versi lain/terkait

Lampiran Berkas

Komentar

---

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar