CD Skripsi

analisis yuridis surat edaran mahkamah agung nomor 05 tahun 2021 tentang gugurnya pemeriksaan praperadilan dikaitkan denganputusan mahkamah konstitusi nomor 102/puu-xiii/2015

---

Law enforcers or people tasked with enforcing the law cover a very broad
scope, because it involves officers at the upper, middle, and lower levels. The
Supreme Court issued Circular Letter of the Supreme Court Number 5 of 2021
concerning the Implementation of the Formulation of the Results of the Plenary
Meeting of the Supreme Court Chamber in 2021 as a Guideline for the
Implementation of Duties for the Court. The formulation of the Criminal Chamber
number 3 in this SEMA regulates "in criminal cases, since the case files are
transferred and received by the Court, the Pretrial examination as referred to in
Article 82 Paragraph (1) letter d of the Criminal Procedure Code will
immediately be dropped, because since the main case was transferred to the
Court, the status of the Suspect has changed to the Defendant, the status of his
detention has changed to the authority of the Judge. In the event that the Pretrial
Judge still decides and grants the Applicant's request, the decision does not stop
the examination of the main case".
The research questions are as follows: 1) Are the provisions of the Pretrial
Procedure stipulated in the Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 05 of 2021 in
accordance with the Constitutional Court Decision Number 102/PUU-XIII/2015?
and 2) How should the Pretrial Procedure Regulation be in accordance with the
Laws and Regulations in Indonesia? This study uses a normative legal research
method. The main materials discussed in this study are the files of the Supreme
Court Circular Letter No. 5 of 2021 and the Constitutional Court Decision
Number 102/PUU-XIII/2015. This study uses a qualitative analysis which is a
research method that produces descriptive data, namely what is stated in writing.
After the Constitutional Court Decision No. 102/PUU/XIII/2015, the
determination of the termination of the pretrial procedure is no longer interpreted
in various ways. The Constitutional Court stated that the pretrial procedure was
declared terminated when the first hearing was held on the main case on behalf of
the defendant/applicant for the pretrial procedure. The basis for the Judge
examining the pretrial motion to dismiss the pretrial motion is evidence that can
show that the first hearing of the main case on behalf of the defendant/pretrial
motion applicant has been held.
Keywords: Pretrial, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court

---

Ketersediaan

Informasi Detail

Judul Seri

-

No. Panggil

2110247748

Penerbit

Pekanbaru : UNRI – PASCA – Magister Ilmu Hukum., 2025

Deskripsi Fisik

-

Bahasa

Indonesia

ISBN/ISSN

-

Klasifikasi

2110247748

Tipe Isi

-

Tipe Media

-

Tipe Pembawa

-

Edisi

-

Subjek

MAGISTER ILMU HUKUM

Info Detail Spesifik

-

Pernyataan Tanggungjawab

Rahmat

Versi lain/terkait

Lampiran Berkas

Komentar

---

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar