Analysis of Evidence for the Crime of Money Laundering That Does Not Require Preliminary Proof of the Predicate Crime
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35335/legal.v11i5.517Keywords:
Proof, The Crime of Money Laundering, Original CrimeAbstract
This study aims to analyze the the Legislative Ratio Article 69 UURI No. 8 of 2010 concerning Prevention and Eradication of the Crime of Money Laundering that Does Not Require Proof of Excess Preliminary Crime in the Crime of Money Laundering. The research was conducted using a normative juridical research method using a statutory approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The results of the study indicate that the process of handling money laundering cases is essentially very dependent on the original crime as contained in the provisions of Article 2 UURI No. 8 of 2010 which is an element in the crime of money laundering must come from a criminal act. In line with the above basis, Article 69 has been formulated which reads “In order to be able to carry out investigations, prosecutions, examinations in court proceedings against the crime of money laundering, it is not necessary to first prove the original crime”. Where the crime of money laundering can be investigated, prosecuted, and brought to court without having to first prove the original crime and not having to wait for the verdict of the predicate crime which has permanent legal force (inkracht).
Downloads
References
Amrullah., M. A. (2020). Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang Dalam Perspektif Kejahatan Terorganisasi: Pencegahan dan Pemberantasannya. Jakarta: Kencana.
Arief., B. N. (2004). Beberapa Masalah Perbandingan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Ayumiati. (2012). Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang (Money Laundering) dan Strategi Pemberantasan. Jurnal Legitimasi Vol. 1 No. 2, Fakultas Syari’ah IAIN Ar-Raniry, 76.
Eddyono, S. W., & Chandra, Y. I. (2015). Mengurai Implementasi dan Tantangan Anti Pencucian Uang di Indonesia. Jakarta: Institute For Justice Reform.
Garnasih, Y. (2015). Penegakan Hukum Anti Pencucian Uang dan Permasalahannya di Indonesia. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Garnasih, Y. (2015). Penegakan Hukum Anti Pencucian Uang dan Permasalahannya di Indonesia. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Halif. (2017). Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang Tanpa Dakwaan Tindak Pidana Asal: Kajian Putusan Nomor 57/Pid.Sus/2014/PN.Slr. Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 10 No. 2, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Jember, 174.
Husein, Y. (2008). Negeri Sang Pencuci Uang. Jakarta: Pustaka Juanda Tiga Lima.
Irwansyah, & Yunus, A. (2021). Penelitian Hukum, Pilihan Metode & Praktik Penulisan Artikel, Edisi Revisi. Yogyakarta: Mirra Buana Media.
Jahja, J. S. (2012). Melawan Money Laundering: Mengenal, Mencegah, & Memberantas Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. Jakarta: Visi Media.
Kristiana, Y. (2015). Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang Perspektif Hukum Progresif. Yogyakarta: Thafa Media.
Marzuki, P. M. (2013). Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Grup.
RI., B. K. (2021, Desember Tanggal 8 ). Perlukah Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Asal dalam Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. Retrieved from badiklat.kejaksaan.go.id: https://badiklat.kejaksaan.go.id/artikel/detail/580#,
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2003). Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
Wiyono, R. (2014). Pembahasan Undang-Undang Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Yurizal. (2017). Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang (Money Laundering) di Indonesia. Malang: MNC Publishing.
