English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The implementation of the burden of proof reversal system in Indonesia has existed since the discussion of the Draft Law (RUU) on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes in 1970. At that time, there was an idea about one pattern of eradicating criminal acts of corruption, namely accepting a system of proof reversal. The burden of reversal proof system is a proof system that deals with criminal procedural law which is very differential in nature with a universal proof system that has been known through negative evidence. This study entitled "Reversing the Load of Evidence Against the Study of Corruption Cases in Class IA Jayapura District Court". The purpose of this study was to find out the application of a system of proof reversal in corruption in the Jayapura District Court and to find out the obstacles faced in implementing a verification reversal system in the Jayapura District Court. The research method in this study uses a type of empirical juridical research law. Based on the research, it is found that the verification of corruption case in the District Court of Class IA Jayapura has not yet implemented a system of reversing the burden of proof as mandated in Law No.31 of 1999 jo Law No.20 of 2001. Implementation of reversal of the burden of proof in practice is still in conflict with the principle of presumption of innocence or the principle of presumption of innocence that has been recognized internationally and is also regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code, there are several Articles contained in Law Number 20 Year 2001 which is contradictory to Law Number 12 Year 2005 on the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, by the exercise or enforcement of burden-proofing systems may result in the misuse of authority by law enforcement officers, neither the implementation nor the reversal of the burden of proof as reversal of the burden of proof is limited. Suggested implementation or implementation of reversal of burden of proof in the District Court Class IA Jayapura and in the implementation of reversal of the burden of proof is required a clear rule on the provision of reversal of the burden of proof by not ignoring the principle of presumption of innocence, the affirmation of the meaning and procedure of reversing the burden of proof. Keywords— Reversal of the burden of proof; Corruption.

Revenue Of Opening Expenses On Criminal Action Of Corruption (Case Study in IA Jayapura District Court)