Abstract
The main objective of this research is to analyse and explain the regulation and mechanism for the implementation of the execution of evidence of excise crimes legally carried out in the Bogor Regency District Attorney's Office and to analyse and explain the authority of the Prosecutor in the implementation of the execution of evidence of excise crimes that have permanent legal force. The method used is the normative legal research method using the statutory approach and the case approach. The types of legal materials used are sourced from secondary data obtained from primary legal materials in the form of legislation, secondary legal materials in the form of textbooks, journals, legal expert opinions, relevant legal cases, and tertiary legal materials in the form of legal dictionaries. The results of the study indicate that the regulation and mechanism for the implementation of the execution of evidence of excise crimes legally carried out in the Bogor Regency District Attorney's Office implement cooperation with customs in the form of a Joint Agreement between the Director General of Customs and Excise of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia and the Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes of the Republic of Indonesia Attorney's Office. related to the coordination of criminal law enforcement in the field of customs and excise where the implementation of the confiscation of excisable goods is carried out after receiving a court decision that has permanent legal force and the settlement of excisable goods that are confiscated for the state is carried out in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations governing the management of confiscated state goods. The authority of the Prosecutor in implementing the execution of evidence of excise crimes that have permanent legal force has legal constraints from the absence of special rules governing the auction of confiscated goods in the Criminal Code. Every criminal procedure should be regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), but the regulation of the settlement of confiscated goods does not have a legal basis for the prosecutor as the executor in terms of criminal procedure law. Apart from that, it is also necessary to determine the extent to which the Prosecutor can carry out the Execution of Evidence according to existing regulations the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP).
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call