Putusan Praperadilan Pengadilan Negeri Sintang Nomor : 01/pid.prap/2015/pn.stg Memenangkan Termohon yang Melakukan Penangkapan dan Penahanan yang Tidak Sesuai dengan Ketentuan Kuhap

This thesis discusses pretrial about the arrests and detentions in relation to the rights of the accused under the Criminal Code (Studies Pretrial Sintang District Court Decision No. 01 / Pid.Prap / 2015 / PN.Stg). The method used in this research is normative juridical approach. From the results of this thesis can be concluded that the function of pretrial within the scope of the jurisdiction of Sintang has been running optimally. Pretrial case that was last recorded in the District Court pretrial Sintang is the case with the Sintang District Court No. 01 / Pid.Prap / 2015 / PN.Stg. And after that there are no more cases of pretrial incoming afterwards. This shows that the implementation of the pre-trial functions has been running well in controlling horizontally between relevant law enforcement authorities such as judges, public prosecutors and the police. In addition praeradilan maximal function can also be on the performance of judges, or police as an investigator or prosecutor as a public prosecutor under examination in accordance with the procedures set out in the Act - legislation. Every action or forceful measures undertaken such as the arrest, detention, seizure, search, and others - others have been carried out in accordance with the law. But in practice often encountered effort or coercive measures that violate the provisions of the Act - legislation. This is due to the lack of information and knowledge about the existence of this pretrial institution and its function and purpose. This is exploited by elements investigators that "rogue" to take action "mischievous" as well for no apparent reason which could potentially lead to violations of the human rights tesangka or defendant. Therefore, the role of the community to assist in carrying out its functions pretrial order to run more optimally and is not expected to happen again in the future human rights violations as a result of acts or attempted forcible violation of law - Pretrial undang.Putusan Sintang District Court No. 01 / Pid.Prap /2015/PN.Stg, basically in accordance with the provisions of applicable laws or rules in the legislation. From the contents of the decision which contain the validity of detention as the rule of law in the Article 79 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as well as from consideration consideration of the judge in imposing sentence. But the trouble is the administrative process that tends pretrial examination case is not in accordance with the laws and procedures. A course on the establishment day of the trial. Under the draft, Article 82 paragraph (1) letter a, the determination of the trial which is three days after the register but in the decision only a day after the register. Sebenanya it was infringing. But with regard to the principle of justice quickly then this is understandable and is considered normal. Considering that not to register this process is time consuming and hinder the process of examination. In addition, by sulking on the rule of law stated in Article 82 paragraph (2) letter c of the Criminal Procedure Code that the decision should have dropped seven days after the case is registered, are not met. However, generally speaking appropriate as mentioned above mainly about the mere consideration of the decision and the judge in the verdict, that the Sintang District Court's Decision No. 01 / Pid.Prap / 2015 / PN.Stg, in accordance with the rule of law as set preformance legislation - law that legislation - Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Law of Criminal Procedure