Abstract

The urgency of the control mechanism over the Attorney General's authority in overriding cases in the public interest (seponeering) is a manifestation of obtaining protection of human rights for every citizen who is harmed by the issuance of seponeering by the Attorney General. Apart from these reasons, the importance of controlling the authority of the Attorney General is also to create the principles of justice and legal certainty. Legal practices that often occur in the judicial process show stagnation in realizing these three things, both the protection of human rights (HAM), justice and legal certainty. Whereas the spirit of forming the Criminal Procedure Code which was promulgated based on Law Number 8 of 1981 laid the basic foundation for the protection of human rights (HAM) as the main goal, which includes upholding justice and legal certainty. There is stagnation in the effort to control the seponeering issued by the Attorney General, because there are juridical limitations in the pretrial object institution as stated in the Elucidation of Article 77 of Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code which states that: with "discontinuation of prosecution" does not include setting aside cases for the public interest which are the authority of the Attorney General.

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.