Analisis Putusan Praperadilan dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang (Studi Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 33/Pid.Prap/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel.)

Abstract

This research aims to find out the basic reasons why the applicant's pretrial request is in accordance with the applicable provisions and to find out the judge's considerations regarding the application of the law so as to grant the applicant'spretrial request in the case of decision No. 33/Pid.Pra/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel. This research uses a normative juridical legal research method by using a statutory approach to study the statutory regulations in decision no. 33/ Pid.Prap/ 2020/ PN.Jkt.Sel. The types and sources of legal materials used in this research are secondary data which includes primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials using library study collection techniques and online/internet data searching. The analysis used is qualitative analysis, namely by explaining clearly explained theories related to the problem being studied. The results of this research are (1) The basis for conducting a pretrial petition is article 77, article 79 of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) and the Constitutional Court decision no. 21/PUU- (2) In decision no. 33/Pid.Pra/2020/PN.Jkt.Sel.The judge's consideration granted the pretrial request and was named a suspect for the crime of fraud and embezzlement as intended in Article 372 and/or 378 of the Criminal Code and/or Articles 3,4 and 5 of Law Number 8 of 2010 concerning Money Laundering by the applicant is invalid or legally flawed on the basis that there is insufficient evidence and the investigation was not carried out in accordance with legal procedures. However, according to researchers, based on the title, the case must be carried out in front of several parties and is a group discussion. Based on the Regulation of the Head of the Criminal Investigation Agency of the State Police of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 4 of 2014 concerning Standard Operational Procedures for Supervising Criminal Investigations (PERKABA No. 4 of 2014) in Appendix letter C. Standard Operational Procedures for Carrying Out Ordinary Cases, in Number: 3 letter g concerning Case Title Mechanism. To be determined as a potential suspect, it is sufficient to have two pieces of evidence in article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in the Constitutional Court decision no. 12/PUU-XII/2014 determines that the suspect must have at least two pieces of sufficient evidence. Keywords :