| Summary: | That truly on UU No.8 Year 1981 about KUHAP and also UU 31 Year 1997
about Military Justice had ruled mechanism how to presiding military member which
done criminal act together with civil member on one place justice what they presiding
in public justice or military justice, it depends on point of painful that appear. If point
of painful is common so it can judged in public justice it opposite if the point of
painful on military so it can judged in military justice.
In practice the regulation inclined unsuccessful that judged be partly (
splitzing). It caused appears criminal act banking especially related on article 46
sentence (1) UU No. 7 Year 1992 like had changed on UU No. 10 Year 1998 about
Banking which can called Dark Criminal Act Bank.
The data which used in this research is secondary data and primary data.
Secondary data got through studies library research or studies of document. The field
research doing to get primary data for completes the secondary data trough interview
and studies case file in High Military Prosecutor II Jakarta Office.
From the result of researches in High Military Prosecutor II Jakarta Office
knowen what the reason or considering military prosecutor accept case of criminal
act banking that should that case proceed by file connective, although military
prosecutor accepting and consider it can submit military court. The considering by
justice principle that was quick, ordinary and low cost, easily on criminal act
elements approved in court, and following several judge decisions previous on the
same case ( yurisprudensi).
|
|---|