American Forum USINDO Indonesia transparency in Criminal Justice System have providing a talk on speaker sources from Michael Kagay District Attorney for third Judicial District of the State of Kansas, Brian MacHarg Director of Civic Engagement Appalanchian State University and Choky Ramadhan an Executive Director, Indonesia Judiciary Monitoring Society (MaPPI FH UI).
Current practice of Administration Court in Jakarta proceeding require a minimum of Rp 500,000 to be deposited to challenge police judgement for traffic court and for procedure of property felony is by request of accessible investigation of police to mandatorily pay for Rp 2 million to be deposited without guaranteed for report of police investigation or "BAP" (Berita Acara Polisi ) to individual defendant and return on deposit fee when the access of that current information and requisition to available for hearing and trial court . Indonesia government need to reform for example through civic organization for example MaPPI. Criminal transparency and relation of civic service organization need to take a public forum to understand the situation for good of all citizen and procedural court and pre-court proceeding help the citizen of ease and cost less court proceeding and trust the police judgement
Transparency in Criminal Justice system: whether System Reform and Civic Engagement of today forum open the idea to press publicity and transparency of police organization. More Institute Criminal Justice Reform has worked on published articles of ICU 3/2017: Indonesia's Legal Framework on Defamation Law
According to Institute Criminal Justice Reform
1, Criminal Defamation in the Draft Criminal Code (R KUHP): elements of Criminal Defamation should be more precise, justifications must be expanded and criminal sanctions should be lighter instead of Escalation of Criminal Sanction for Criminal Defamation Acts in the Rencangan KUHP (Pre Planned KUHP) from Oral, Written, Slander, Minor Contempt, Slander Complaint, False Suspicion, to Defamation against deceased people.
2. Institute of Criminal Justice also need to reform for Authority of Justice (Police) treat criminal inhuman and any other cruel act that under current government and DPR work to ban act of torture in criminal proceeding investigation (Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment/UNCAT)
For example recently in 2018
Torture and sex harrasement during police investigation of daugther of Inang Naburju sourced by Advocate Hotman Paris at Kopi Joni Kelapa Gading
Other common for lottery agent in Bengkali was detained recently content informed www.cakaplah.com by clicking this content information now. The press release kapolsek does not care on abuse of power of police towards detainees and fair trail in court towards for example how long the two detainees will be at police arrest at maxim um and what is the resolution and any divert resolution to justice to this misdemeanor case instead of display the act of arrest and siezed to punishment to the full extent. As the propagate journalist media cakaplah.com only tell half the story and without consent of the press release publicity for fair trial before court for their privacy information. No more access further information and hearing necessary by cakaplah.com for responsibility to publicity for further what happen to this two detainees.
This edition of ICLU elaborates the legal framework yon defamation law in Indonesia. The discussion will cover all provisions regarding both criminal defamation and civil defamation currently incorporated in various Indonesian laws.
It is noteworthy that the current situation on freedom of expression in Indonesia becomes more interesting for discussion. In particular, the discussion regarding on 16 August 2017.
We are hoping that this edition of ICLU will help you as the readers to gain proper knowledge regarding defamation law in Indonesia.
As Indonesia citizen, if you would like to contribute and donate as little as Rp 15000 to Institute of Criminal Justice Reform Click here Now.
As historical wrong perspective of the criminal law of Indonesia is final and based fixed historically on the law of Dutch. Indonesia KUPH and its articles are products of house representative of Indonesia herself but not "Orang Bule or Orang Asing" Indonesia criminal law that have been practiced for mandatory fee compulsion toward proceeding traffic ticket is product of non-passing reformed of traffic court during current government administration. Indonesia citizen does not have free access to court administration proceeding without court fee for fair hearing trial.
As an advocate, Michael Kagay District Court in State of Kansas. Kansas State police district require to use camera bodyware for transparency operation of criminal and investigation and arrested by policemen . As the advocate, Advocate Michael prefer instead of full extend of secure public safety, diversion has been prefer for property crime as 9% of crime felony in his district was divert to community service, restitution and etc negotiation after the felony plea guilty. But in Indonesia of case of prior governor Jakarta defamation law, full the punishment by religious activist are on the rise. As Religious civic organization, Indonesia religious activist propagate their agenda to gain moments of anti government rhetoric instead of publicity is very soul of justice. It keep the judge himself while trying under trial. As the hoax rumor gain of confusion, anti thesis towards current government that reform the political agenda.
Hailed by Glenn Beck as a “Watchdog,” bestselling author and legal expert Christopher Horner explains how every citizen can use the Freedom of Information Act to find out what our government is up to.
LIBERALS ARE HIDING THE TRUTH FROM YOU. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT, AMERICA?
Hailed by Glenn Beck as a “watchdog” and by Rush Limbaugh as a “go-to guy,” bestselling author and attorney Christopher C. Horner is a leader in the fight against liberal tyranny in America—with his requests for information even declared “criminal” by the Obama administration. Revealing explosive new information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act and well-placed sources, Horner exposes the tightly kept secret of liberals running our government and schools: a carefully managed war to undermine the taxpayers’ right to see what their government is up to.
WHAT IS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HIDING?
During his campaign, Barack Obama promised “the most transparent administration in history.” Not only has this proven to be an empty promise, but he and his liberal allies systematically hide their activities from the public. They use private email accounts and computers, avoid creating records, stonewall information requests, and otherwise delay or deny access to information every taxpayer has a right to know. This eye-opening book exposes the White House tricks, tactics, and “tradecraft” now regularly used to keep Americans in the dark. You’ll learn:
* Scandalous examples of activist government employee tricks to hide their activities.
* How the Obama administration, which leaks sensitive information for political gain (while aggressively prosecuting whistleblowers), deliberately politicized the FOIA process to stonewall legitimate requests for public information.
* What the Democrats tried to hide about their crony deals with big business, Solyndra, various liberal initiatives, and UN schemes.
* How American colleges and universities bow to radical liberal faculties to hide public records.
* How to fight these tactics and make your own FOIA requests to get the information you need—even when the government tries to stop you.
This is more than an exposé on the latest Washington cover-up. It is a wake-up call and how-to manual for all Americans to demand transparency from our leaders and defeat the liberal attack on open and honest debate. If you believe in America, you need to fight for your freedoms. You need to take a stand against the Liberal War on Transparency.
When he invoked China's mainstream academia to criticize the "weaknesses" of Chinese criminal procedure-such as dossier-based proceedings, powerful prosecutors, and activist judiciary-the author, Shuai Zhang, was told by his supervisors in the Netherlands that this was just how things were done. Later on, he found that adversarial dogmas are common in the Chinese legal community, with the textbooks on criminal procedure playing a role to mislead people. While many exemplary common law countries have deviated from their adversarial traditions to begin to embrace an inquisitorial approach-especially in pre-trial procedure-adversarial dogmas do not speak to each and every country. In a broader sense, the author cautions Chinese liberal intellectuals against their inherent, and perhaps unconscious, sense of superiority over both the officialdom and the populace regarding political and legal issues. This sense of superiority blinds them to what really contributes to the well-being of the country and the people, and drive various "window dressing" reforms rather than functional improvements. Dissertation. (Series: Willem Pompe Institute, Vol. 87) [Subject: Chinese Studies, Criminal Law]
No comments:
Post a Comment