Crown Witness Research Articles

Crown Witness: Analysis of Position and Justice in Islamic Criminal Law

Crown Witness: Analysis of Position and Justice in Islamic Criminal Law

The material-legal conditions for admitting evidence from the testimony of a crown witness in the Polish criminal procedure

Crown witness is an institution designed to combat organized crime. The material and legal conditions for admitting evidence from their testimony are contained in Article 1 of the Crown Witness Act. This article provides an analysis of the subject matter scope of the appearance of a crown witness in the Polish criminal proceedings. In the text, the author appropriately presents an analysis of the issues of an organized criminal group and an association aimed at committing crimes, characterizes in an enumerated manner the offenses listed in paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the Criminal Code and the Sports Law. Additionally, the author conducts a detailed review of the negative criteria for obtaining the status of a crown witness. In the text, the author relies on available literature on the subject and domestic court judgments.

PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM DALAM MENILAI SAKSI MAHKOTA PADA TINDAK PIDANA MEMBANTU MELAKUKAN PEMBUNUHAN BERENCANA

<em>This study aims to determine whether the crown witness was considered by the judge in proving the crime of assisting premeditated murder in Decision Number 41/Pid.B/2021/PN Bil. This research is a normative legal research that is prescriptive and applied. This research uses a case approach. The legal materials used are primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. The legal material collection technique used in this legal research is literature study. The results of this study indicate that in Decision Number 41/Pid.B/2021/PN Bil, the crown witness was considered by the judge. The use of crown witnesses is allowed while still observing the provisions in submitting crown witnesses. These provisions are the separation of case files, lack of evidence, and criminal acts in the form of participation. The judge's consideration in Decision Number 41/Pid.B/2021/PN Bil which uses a crown witness is in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. Based on the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor which was strengthened by the testimony of the crown witness, the judge was convinced that the criminal act had actually occurred and the defendant was the one guilty of committing it. The use of crown witnesses in this case was able to facilitate the judge in imposing punishment on the defendant who helped commit premeditated murder.</em><p><em>Keywords: <a href="/verstek/article/view/73296">Crown Witness; Evidence; Judge's Consideration</a></em></p>

KEKUATAN PEMBUKTIAN SAKSI MAHKOTA SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI DALAM PEMBUKTIAN TINDAK PIDANA PENCURIAN DENGAN PEMBERATAN

<em>This article analyses the strength of the crown witness evidence in proving qualified theft crime in Verdict Number 342/Pid.B/2021/PN Sbr. The purpose of this article is to determine the strength of evidence of the crown witness in proving qualified theft crime. This research is normative legal research which is perspective and applied. This legal research uses a case approach. Types of legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials. The technique of collecting legal materials used is library research. The analysis technique used is the deductive method. Based on the research results, it can be understood that the strength of evidence of the crown witness in proving qualified theft crime in Verdict Number 342/Pid.B/2021/PN Sbr is valid and accountable because it has fulfilled the requirements as evidence. As for the strength of evidence, it is independent and depends on the judge's judgment.</em><p>Keywords: <a href="/verstek/article/view/73022"><em>Strength of Evidence; Protection of the Defendant's Human Rights; Crown Witness.</em></a></p>

Instytucja świadka koronnego w świetle dyrektywy zakazu zamiany ról procesowych i wybranych zakazów dowodowych polskiej procedury karnej

The institution of the crown witness in Poland was introduced into the legal order in 1997 and its aim was to effectively counteract organized crime, which at that time was experiencing its heyday. Being very controversial from the very beginning, with numerous voices of criticism and approval at the same time, over the years it has consolidated its position and for 25 years has continuously contributed to breaking the conspiracy of silence of the perpetrators of crimes of the greatest severity. The subject of the article is the analysis of the institution of the crown witness in the context of the element of the procedural role of the perpetrator and selected evidentiary prohibitions of the Polish criminal procedure. The author confronts the eponymous institution with the prohibition of changing procedural roles, the prohibition of excluding the freedom of expression of the person being questioned, and the prohibition related to obtaining an evidentiary statement that cannot constitute evidence. The role of these prohibitions is to shape truthful findings in the criminal process and to guarantee its fairness. The procedure for granting the status of a crown witness, which is a kind of compromise between the fairness of the trial and the purpose of the institution, carries the risk of abuse in this area. The threat concerns the violation of the principle of material truth and the protection of the procedural position of the accused who has not obtained the status of a crown witness.

Peranan Saksi Mahkota Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Kasus Pembunuhan Berencana Brigadir Joshua Dikaitkan Dengan Asas Non Self Incrimination

Abstract-The purpose of this study was to analyze the role of the crown witness in the premeditated murder case of Brigadier Joshua associated with the principle of non-self-incrimination and the obstacles to using a crown witness in the premeditated murder case of Brigadier Joshua associated with the principle of non-self-incrimination. This writing research method uses a normative juridical method with three approaches, namely the statutory approach (statute approach), conceptual approach (conceptual approach), and case approach (case approach). The results of the research on the role of the crown witness in the premeditated murder case of Brigadier Joshua were linked to the principle of non-self-incrimination, there were five defendants who were used as crown witnesses against the other defendants namely Ferdy Sambo, Putri Candrawathi, Bripka Ricky Rizal, Strong Ma'ruf and Bharada E However, there were two defendants who refused to be the crown witness for the other defendant, namely Ferdy Sambo who refused to be a witness for Putri Candrawathi, and vice versa Putri Candrawathi refused to be a witness for Ferdy Sambo. With this in mind, there are obstacles that come from obstacles to the defendant, obstacles to evidence, and obstacles to the trial judge. Based on this study, the use of crown witnesses in court proceedings is common. Aims to open the veil of crime from the defendant who was used as a witness. However, the use of crown witnesses must still pay attention to the human rights of the accused. In criminal law theory, this provision is referred to as the principle of non-self-incrimination, namely the defendant has the right not to provide information that incriminates himself (privilege against self-incrimination), which in practice the attitude of silence and not admitting to the accused is used as an excuse or circumstance that can be aggravating for punishing the accused.

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP JUSTICE COLLABORATORDALAM KASUS PEMBUNUHAN BERENCANA (Studi Pada KasusRichard Eliezer)

Justice Collaborator is often interpreted as “Crown Witness”. The case of the premeditated murder of BrigadierNofriansyah Yosua Hutabarat in 2022 became a hot topic of conversation among the Indonesian people,involving high-ranking police officers and their aides, one of the perpetrators, namely Richard Eliezer, thenventured to volunteer to become a Justice Collaborator to reveal the facts about the premeditated murderincident. the. Justice Collaborator usually reveal certain crime cases that are categorized as extraordinarycrimes or extraordinary crimes in Indonesia, where Justice Collaborator play an important role, especiallyassisting law enforcers such as investigators and public prosecutors, from the process of investigation,investigation, to examination at trial, witnesses play a role is so important that it is often the determiningreason when uncovering the case. The type of research used in this study is Normative Juridical research whichbases its analysis on Law Number 31 of 2014 Concerning the Protection of Witnesses and Victims, Article 340of the Criminal Code, and Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 4 of 2011 which is valid and relevant to thelegal issues that become focus of research Legal protection for Justice Collaborator in premeditated murdercases. Legal protection is a form of service that must be provided by the government to provide a sense ofsecurity to every citizen. LPSK provides full protection for Richard Eliezer in protecting Richard Eliezer duringthe trial process. all the things he knows about a problem, be it who is the main actor and so on, so that the casebecomes clear.

The Crown Witness From the Point of View of Islamic Criminal Law in Truth Discovery of Criminal Cases in Indonesia

This article aims to elucidate Islamic criminal law's point of view on the existence of crown witnesses in the truth discovery of criminal cases in Indonesia. In fulfilling the shortage of witness evidence, one of the perpetrators of the crime was carried as a case witness in the case. This study uses normative research methods by reviewing books relevant to the problem (Library Research) by tracing, comparing, and analyzing normative doctrinal law through a qualitative approach regarding crown witnesses. This study found that Islamic criminal law requires fairness to be accepted as a witness. If a crown witness is indeed needed as evidence to reveal a criminal case without being accompanied by other supporting evidence, then a crown witness is permitted. Should there is other evidence, the crown witness will be disqualified because the crown witness does not meet fair requirements. The rule of law in Indonesia based on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) article 185 paragraph 2 states that the statement of one witness is insufficient to prove a criminal case called the principle of unus testis nullus testis (one witness is not a witness). Therefore, there are no other witnesses apart from the crown witness.

Instruments Inducing the Cooperation of Members of Organised Criminal Groups with Law Enforcement Authorities in Polish Criminal Law – Article 60(3) and Article 259 of the Polish Criminal Code

The article is devoted to the analysis of instruments used to induce cooperation of members of organised criminal groups with law enforcement authorities. The most important regulations relating to this problem in terms of substantive criminal law are Article 60(3) and Article 259 of the Criminal Code. The article presents selected problems of interpretation of both provisions, the problem of their possible concurrence and also indicates the reasons why particularly Article 259 of the CC, despite the fact that it provides for complete impunity of the perpetrator, is not very often used in practice. This is because the benefits offered by it do not cover, which is fully justified, individual offences committed by an offender who is a member of a criminal group. Attention was also drawn to other criminal law and procedural institutions with similar functions, including in particular the institution of a crown witness.

The Legal Position of Crown Witnesses as Evidence in Corruption Trials: A Narrative Literature Review

The use of crown witness evidence can only be seen in criminal cases in the form of participation, and separation of those criminal cases has been carried out since the preliminary examination process at the investigative level. Some parties argue that the use of crown witnesses is permissible because it aims to achieve a sense of public justice. However, some are of the opinion that the use of crown witnesses is not permissible because it is contrary to the basic rights and sense of justice of the accused. This is because the crown witness has the status of a defendant and has the right to remain silent or even the right to give answers that are denied or lie. This review aims to describe the use of crown witnesses and the power of crown witness statements in corruption trials in Indonesia.

Procedural conditions for admitting evidence from the testimony of a crown witness in Polish criminal procedure

The procedural criminalistic institution of a crown witness is one of the most effective mechanisms for combating organized crime at the disposal of the justice system. The aim of this article is to analyse Article 3 of the Crown Witness Act, which presents a collection of obligatory and facultative conditions that a suspect must fulfil in the process of applying for the status of a crown witness. This provision can be seen as a complement to the definition in Article 2 of the aforementioned Act. In the text, the author discusses the issue of the content of statements made by the accused, who is seeking to obtain the status of a crown witness, as well as the mechanism that obliges them to provide testimony in court. Additionally, the facultative condition of the suspect's commitment to returning any financial benefits derived from the crime or fiscal offense and compensating for damages incurred as a result of its commission is explored. The considerations are based on available literature and current legislation. The author also refers to court rulings concerning the discussed provisions and the line of jurisprudence related to the assessment of testimony provided by a crown witness.

Implementation of Solving Criminal Cases (Splitsing) in the Proof Process in Criminal Trials

The role of a witness who is also an actor in the same case is referred to as a witness who is also a suspect "crown witness". The role of a witness is really needed to uncover a crime that was committed by more than one person together. To uncover evidence of who was involved, what were the roles of the perpetrators and how the crime could be committed. The purpose of this study is to find out how splitsing is implemented in criminal cases. The method used is philosophy juridical with a statutory and case approach, this study uses secondary data supported by primary legal materials such as laws, secondary legal materials in the form of journals and books. The results of this study indicate that the testimony of other defendants was carried out by the public prosecutor who has the authority to split the case files (spiltsing) so that the public prosecutor can reveal the testimony of witnesses and defendants that are the same or different and make it easier to find out the main perpetrators of the crime. The basis for separating the case files is in Article 142 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The Institution of Crown Witness in the Light of Selected Rules of Polish Criminal Procedure

The trial institution of crown witness is an effective instrument in combating organized crime. It is one of the controversial institutions because it violates the leading principles of the Polish criminal procedure. In the article, the author confronts the institution of crown witness with selected principles of the Polish criminal trial. With the legality principle, the principle of equal rights for the parties to the criminal trial, the principle of free assessment of evidence, the objectivity principle and the fair trial principle. The aim of the article is to indicate the threats that the crown witness institution poses for the proper course of criminal proceedings. The perpetrator who appears in a criminal trial as a witness is an opportunistic exception in an extraordinary situation. It must be approached with utmost care and caution to ensure that the criminal trial is carried out in accordance with the law, remembering that it is a kind of compromise between the fairness of the trial and the institution’s purpose—to combat organized crime.

Testimoniality: A lexicon of witnesses of Holocaust non-sites of memory in Poland

The authors analyse grassroots modalities of the figure of witness in the communities living in the vicinity of uncommemorated sites of past violence. Testimoniality, understood as the disposition to bear witness, i.e. both the willingness to testify and the ability to provide important information, is discussed in relation to complex, heterogenic and dynamic assemblages that form around the sites in question, comprising both human (neighbours, wardens) and non-human actors (the landscape and biotope, material objects), diverse practices, performative gestures, and relations. The analysis is placed in the context of the debate on the complicated status of the “witness” as a category in the Polish post-war culture of memory, as well as of new relevant categories emerging in both Polish and international scholarship on the Holocaust. The authors conceptually systematise testimonial situations and propose a lexicon of testimonial positions, practices and objects that are grounded in the material gathered in fieldwork during the research project on unmemorialised sites of genocide in Poland. They distinguish: the crown witness, the trustee, the volunteer, the official and the contingent witness, and discuss categories of testimonial gesture, testimonial performance, testimonial object, and testimonial words.

Special case of temporary suspension of criminal prosecution (§ 159C and § 159D of the Criminal Procedure Code): an effective legal instrument in the fight against corruption or covert introduction of the institution of crown witness?

Corruption is one of the most dangerous phenomena of contemporary society. So it is no wonder that the legislator and the whole society are always looking for new ways to effectively combat such negative phenomena. However, corruption has one specific feature, which is high latency, compared to other forms of crime. Given that corruption is characterized by a high degree of latency, it is understandable that traditional means of criminal law are unable to ensure effective detection and prosecution of this type of crime. There is a relatively new procedural legal instrument in the fight against corruption in Section 159c and 159d of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, the question is whether this new provision is not merely a covert introduction of the institution of the crown witness into the Czech legal order.

KEKUATAN PEMBUKTIAN SAKSI MAHKOTA PADA PERKARA PEMUFAKATAN JAHAT DALAM TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA

The Evidence Power of Crown Witnesses in Decision Number 400/Pid Sus/2019/PN.Pdg With 401/Pid Sus/2019/PN.Pdg And Decision Number 09/Pid Sus/2019/Pn.Pdg With 10/Pid Sus/2019/PN .Pdg is the same as other witnesses if they have met the requirements as witnesses. The crown witness in the narcotics crime case is the main witness to reveal the crime. The use of crown witnesses is very important because in this criminal act it is very difficult to find witnesses who can explain the chronology of a case because there are no victims and more than one perpetrator. The application of the Penalty in the Decision is a violation of Article 114 of the Narcotics Law. both defendants were guilty of violating Article 114 paragraph (1) of Law Jo, Article 132 paragraph (1) of Law no. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics. The judge handed down the same sentence.

Saksi Mahkota dalam pembuktian pidana kasus Narkotika

A crown witness is a witness who comes or is taken from one of the suspects or other defendants who jointly committed a criminal act, and in which case the witness is given a crown. The crown given to a witness with the status of a defendant is in the form of negating the prosecution of his case or the imposition of a very light charge if the case is submitted to court or is forgiven for wrongdoing. The formulation of the problem in this research is the strength of the testimony of the crown witness in proving narcotics trafficking and the existence of human rights if he is placed as the crown witness in proving the narcotics trafficking. This type of research is an empirical juridical research, namely an integrative and conceptual method of analysis to identify, process and analyze documents to understand the meaning, significance, and relevance that produces descriptive data in the form of written or spoken words from the people or observed behavior. . The results showed that the testimony of the crown witness was considered strong and as strong as the testimony of other witnesses because he was also under oath. The strength of the testimony of the crown witness in proving the narcotics trade in his position as the crown witness has not been regulated separately in the existing law. Crown witness itself is a term that can be interpreted as a defendant who has the status of being a witness in the case of another defendant who has both committed a criminal act, namely in the event that the case files are separated (splitsing) on the separation of the case files during examination based on Article 141 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Human rights are very much considered in the judicial process when the crown witnesses give information such as the absence of intervention that makes the crown witnesses depressed. The existence of human rights when placed as a crown witness in proving narcotics trafficking, where the crown witness is presented before the court because of the splitsing mechanism regulated in Article 142 of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). By splitting the case files into several stand-alone cases, between one defendant and another defendant, each of them can be used as a mutual witness. Meanwhile, if they are combined in one file and in a trial examination, they cannot be used as mutual witnesses between one another. It is recommended to the Government, especially the legislators, that if indeed this crown witness is an important tool to reveal a legal act, then it should make legislation that specifically regulates the existence of Crown Witness.

COLLABORATORS OF JUSTICE: COMPARATIVE LEGAL SOLUTIONS AND CROATIAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL LAW

This paper analyses the procedural position of “collaborators of justice” – (potential) suspects or defendants who choose to cooperate with the authorities by contributing to the detection and prosecution of other serious crimes and perpetrators, primarily by testifying before the court. The aim of the study is to provide an overview of consensual forms and measures of reward for collaborators of justice in comparative law and then to analyse the legal position of a crown witness and a person granted witness immunity, as “collaborators of justice”, in Croatian criminal procedural law. The study is conducted through a comparative legal perspective and with regard to certain issues that have so far been problematised in the scientific and professional literature and in domestic jurisprudence, and which include: the specific goal of these consensual forms and the application of the principle of proportionality, the discretion of the state attorney and judicial control, the procedural and defence rights, and, finally, victims’ rights. Special attention is given to an analysis of the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia and its legal standards, particularly concerning certain issues of the legality of the examination of a crown witness, as well as the legality of examination of a person granted witness immunity.

PENERAPAN ILMU KRIMINALISTIK PADA PENYIDIKAN TINDAK PIDANA CABUL DENGAN KORBAN TUNA WICARA

The application of criminalism in investigating obscene crimes against speech impaired victims by the PPA Unit of the Satreskrim Polres Agam is a science to help strategies in making light of cases. Criminal science is used to obtain information from victims as crown witnesses or victim witnesses, which is rather difficult to do. This is because the daily conditions of the victim cannot hear (deaf), do not speak (mute), so they cannot communicate properly like normal people, and never go to school. In this regard, investigators use criminalistic science with forensic psychology aids, forensic medicine aids and body language or sign science for the deaf. In forensic medicine, it is used by doing visum et repertum as evidence of violence against the reproductive organs. Forensic Psychology is used to examine the victim's psyche and his honesty about what he is going through. During the investigation into the investigation, the victim was also accompanied by a teacher from the Lubuk Basung Special Elementary School (SDLB). Victims are also examined using props or pictures to make it easier for victims to remember what happened to them, because the victim's memory as a person with a mute disability has limitations.

The Position of Convict as Justice Collaborator in Revealing Organized Crime

This article aims to examine the position of the convict as justice collaborator in revealing organized crime. A justice collaborator can assist law enforcement officers. The background of the study is the concept of crown witness, which is often used in proving criminal cases, even though it violates human rights. A difficulty in revealing organized crime is that perpetrators mostly do not disclose their criminal network and the parties involved. Information from the convict related to the network of the crime they committed makes law enforcement officers easier to reveal the organized crime. This study used a juridical analysis with an approach to laws and regulations, conceptual method, and comparative method. The results of the study show that convict who chose to become a justice collaborator has a vital role. Law enforcement officers can take advantage of this role in exposing organized crimes without human rights violations to the convict. The convict can have a reward in the form of parole and additional remissions.