Volume 1 Issue 2, March 2017: pp. 079-097. Copyright © 2017 PALAU. Faculty of Law, Pattimura University, Ambon, , . p-ISSN: 2527-7308 | e-ISSN: 2527-7316. Open Access At : http://fhukum.unpatti.ac.id/jurnal/index.php?journal=palau

Extradition In Criminal Justice System Related To Foreign Jurisdiction

Jan Samuel Maringka

Solicitor General Of Republic Indonesia, Kejaksaan Agung Republik Indonesia Jl Sultan Hasanudin No. 1, Kebayoran Baru, Jakarta, Indonesia Tel./Fax: +62-21-7221269, E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: On extradition law in Indonesia is based from the fact that since the adoption of the Act in 1979, there have been fundamental changes in the criminal procedure ode in Indonesia, namely the enactment of Law No. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Proceedings and has the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Politics Rights (International Convention on Civil and political Rights, abbreviated as ICCPR) under Law No. 12 of 2005 which requires Indonesia to immediately adjust its positive legal provisions in accordance with the principles set out in the ICCPR. Considering the purpose of extradition implementation as an effort to support law enforcement process and related to examination process in extradition case which is not different from the stages of case handling process as regulated in criminal procedure law, it is necessary to affirm the concept of extradition as an integral part of the enforcement process law so that the principle of due process can be implemented consequently in the process of extradition implementation.

Keywords: extraditio; criminal justice system

INTRODUCTION that crime occurred and who becomes thet To face the rapid evolution of crimes, victim.1 international cooperation is key to the The idea to review some of the success of law enforcement related to provisions on extradition law in Indonesia foreign jurisdictions. The establishment of is based from the fact that since the cooperation between countries in adoption of the Act in 1979, there have combating crime is based on the been fundamental changes in the criminal understanding that crimesare serious threat procedure ode in Indonesia, namely the to the every countries economic, security and sovereignty order, regardless where 1 RM. Surachman and Jan S M.48aringka. (2014). Peran Jaksa dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Kawasan Asia Pasifik, Jakarta: Sinar Grafika pg. 157.

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 79 enactment of Law No. 8 of 1981 on practices which emphasis that a nation Criminal Proceedings and has the should give hospitality and provide asylum ratification of the International Covenant for those who seek refuge.3 on Civil and Politics Rights (International Along the way, the practice of Convention on Civil and political Rights, extradition which originally based on an abbreviated as ICCPR) under Law No. 12 agreement can also be done on the basis of of 2005 which requires Indonesia to good relations between the two countries. immediately adjust its positive legal Such habits are further strengthened by provisions in accordance with the HUGO de GROOT or better known as principles set out in the ICCPR. Grotius, who introduced the concept of The need to reform extradition law in international law aut dedere aut puniere Indonesia is also considered important due (that criminals should be punished, to the changes of duties and functions of wherever located or found).4 the Minister of Justice, which in turn The definition of extradition as impacting the effectiveness of it position stipulated in Article 1 of Law No. 1 of the "central authority in the extradition 1979, is a submission by a state to the process as set in Law No. 1 of 1979. requesting state, of a person suspected or convicted of a crime commited within the METHOD territorial jurisdiction of the requesting ANALYSIS AND RECITATION state who have the authority to adjudicate A. Legal Basis and convict that crime. Through equality are pairs of freedom Based on Law No. 1 of 1979, the inherent in every modern concept of incoming extradition process in Indonesia justice.2 can be divided into several phases, namely The word Extraditioncomes from the pre request, inquary of extradition request, Latin laguage, "extradere" or submission. examination of extradition request, Etymologically, extradition can also be approval from president, and submission of devide into two syllables of "extra" and extradite person. Each of these stages can tradition, it because extradition offer a be described as follows: different concept from the tradition

3 Daniel Philpott. (1995). Sovereignty: An 2 Jantje Tjiptabudy, Revency Vania Rugebregt at Introduction and Brief History. Journal of International al. (2016). Natural Resource Management Problems of Affairs. 48: 76. Coastal Areas and Small Island In the Aru Island, 4 Carol Devine, et.al. (1999). Human Rights:The Pattimura Law Journal, 1(I): 48. Essential Reference. Phoenix, USA: Oryx Press. pg. 47.

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 80

1. Pre Request qualify with the conditions stipulated in the According to Article 18 of Law No. agreement, then the requesting state should 1 of 1979, prior an extradition request sent have the opportunity to complete the by the requesting country, the Chief of required documents in the period deemed Indonesia National Police (INP) or the sufficient by the Minister of Justice of the Attorney General may issue detention Republic of Indonesia. After all terms and order to a person seek by other states on requirements referred are met, the Minister the grounds of urgency if the detention is of Justice will sent the extradition request not contrary to the laws of the Republic of and its annexes to the Chief of INP and the Indonesia, with the provison that the Attorney General for an examination. requesting state should state that the However, the procedural framework extradition request document is already as described abovewill be different if the available and will be sent soonlyafter the extradition request is submitted by a arrest. country that does not have an extradition Furthermore, according to Article 19, treaty with Indonesia. According to Article after receiving a detention request issued 39 of Law No. 1 of 1979, in a case that by a competent authorities in the there is no extradition treaty between the requesting state through Interpol or requesting country with Indonesia, than diplomatic channels or directly send by after receiving such request, the Minister post or telegram, the Chief of INP or the of Justice with the consideration from the Attorney General may issue a warrant to Minister of Foreign Affairs have to ask for arrest or detain a person based on the the President‘sapproval before processing Indonesia Criminal Procedure Code. that request. If the extradition request is approved, the President will order the 2. Inquary of Extradition Request Minister of Justice to process further that According to Article 22, extradition request as there is an extradition treaty request must be submitted in writing between the requesting state with the through diplomatic channel to the Minister Republic of Indonesia, but if the of Justice of the Republic of Indonesia to extradition request is denied, the decision be forwarded to the President. According then will be forward to the requesting state to Article 23, if in the opinion of the by the diplomatic channel. Minister of Justice that the request it not

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 81

3. Examination of Extradition Request to ask additional explanation as stipulate in As mentioned above, after all the Article 36, or if extradition is also sought requierement in extradition request is by other countries or if the President has completed (or for requests from non-treaty not rendered its decision or in the case of a countries, after approval of the President), extradition request has been granted, but the Minister of Justice sent the request for not yet implemented. extradition along with it annexes to the The hearing in the District Court is Chief of INP and Attorney General for the conduct in open session, unless the Judge purpose of examination. considers it necessary to do a closed According to Article 25 of Law No. session, in the presence of the prosecutor 1 of 1979, when the crime which become and the requested person. According to the basis of extradition request is a crime Article 29, the Prosecutor summons the subject to detention under the Indonesia requested person to appear before the Criminal Procedure and that a detention Court on the day of the hearing and a request is submitted by the requesting summons should have been received by state, then the person requested for that person at least three (3) days before extradition is liable to detention. the day of the trial. After the court According to Article 34, a detention in determined whether or not the person can extradition case under Article 25 can be be extradite, then the decision and related revoke if ordered by the Court, or if after documents will be immediately handed for 30 (thirty) days, unless extended by the over to the Minister of Justice to be use as court at the request from the prosecutor or further consideration to the President. if the extradition request was rejected by the President. 4. Approval of the Extradition Request. Meanwhile, with regard to the After receiving the Court Decision extension of detention given by the Court, and considerationsfrom the Minister of Article 35 stipulates that the period of Justice, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the detention at any time can be extended up to Attorney General, and the Chief of 30 (thirty) days until the issuence of the INPthen the President decides whether or Court decision which can be in favour or not the requested person can be extradite. reject the extradition request, or if the The Presedential Decree of the extradition Minister of Justice deemed it is necessary request is notify by the Minister of Justice

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 82 to the requesting state via diplomatic days,or in the special condition, after the channel. passage of thirty (30) days), the hand over In the case of extradition request is of requested person is not taking place due submitted by non-treaty countries, then to the ommission of the requesting state, there are 2 (two) kind of then the person may be released. The next President‘sdecision related to the extradition requests against the same crime extradition request, namely: and the same person, after the passage of a. Approval from the President referred 30 (thirty) days, may be rejected by the to the provisions of Article 39 of President Law No. 1 of 1979, which is required Furthermore, Article 41 stipulate that to start the process of examination of if the surrender of extradite person can not the requested person; be carry out because of a condition beyond b. Approval from the President referred the capabilities of the countries (requesting to the provisions of Article 36 of countries or requested country), the Law No. 1 of 1979, as the final country concerned is obliged to inform decision on whether or not a person other countries and both countries will can be extradite, taken after receiving decide together a different date for fecthing the Court Decision with or surrending the extradite person. In such consideration from Minister of case the provisions of Article 40 paragraph Justice, Minister of Foreign Affair, (3) is apply, and the period of time is Attorney General, and the Chief of calculated since the date agreed by both INP. parties.

5. Surrender of Extradite Person B. Implementation of Extradition Law in Practice According to Article 40 of Law No. 1. Extradition Treaties between Indonesia 1 of 1979, if the extradition request is with Other Countries approved, the requested person will Although Law No. 1 of 1979 on immediately handed over to the Extradition was ratified more than three representative of the requesting country, in decades, however, the amount of the a place and at a time determined by the extradition treaty which has been signed by Minister of Justice. If until a period of Indonesia with other countries still a few. time (after the passage of fifteen (15)

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 83

Up to 2015, according to our data, arrest or detention issued competent there are only eight extradition treaty authority in the requesting state. Thus, the which has been ratified by Indonesia, Red Notice equated with official request namely: 1) Malaysia, ratified by Law No. 9 from the requesting country to make an of 1974; 2) the Philippines, ratified by Law arrest or detention of a person whose No. 10 of 1976; 3) Thailand, ratified by extradition is requested.5 Law No. 2 of 1978; 4) Australia, ratified However, the problem becomes by Law No. 8, 1994; 5) Hongkong, ratified complex considering that not all countries by Law No. 1 of 2001; 6) South Korea, that requested an arrest through Red Notice ratified by Law No. 42 of 2007; 7) India, has extradition treaty with Indonesia. In ratified by Law No. 13 of 2014; and 8) that regards, arrests made by the INP based Papua New Guinea, ratified by Law No. 6 on the Red Notice requested by non-treaty of 2015; country raises a separate given pursuant to From the description above, it is Article 39 of Law No. 1/1979 which clear that the extradition treaty which in stipulate that extradition request from non- accordance with Law No. 1 of 1979 should treaty countries needs to be approve by be the basic foundation of the President before it can be proceed. Thus, implementation of extradition between there is a risk that altough an arrest already Indonesia and other countries, in reality not made based on red notice, the extradition able to function optimally. In the end, the request itself can not be proceed because it extradition in Indonesia (both as requested not approve by the President. or requesting country) more rests on the b) Position of the Ministry of Justice as principle of good relations between —Filtering Authority“ Indonesia and other countries. Law No. 1 of 1979 provides a strategic role 2. Incoming Extradition Process to the Minister of Justice in the a) Red Notice implementation process of extradition. The provisions of Article 18 in conjunction When looking at the Act No. 14 of 1970 with Article 19 of Law No. 1 of 1979 in which is used as the basis of the Law No. 1 reality become the basis for INP to arrest of 1979, then it can not be separated from and detain a person based on the Red the position of the Minister of Justice at Notice issued by INTERPOL as long as the that time which is an integral part of the Red Notice also contain the warrant of

5 Ibid.

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 84 judicial authority at the time, given the extradition cases adjusts to the Minister of Justice responsible for configuration pattern as set out in the management of organizational, Criminal Procedure Code, Notice of administrative and financial bodies general Commencement of Investigation (SPDP), courts under the Supreme Court.6 submission of Phase I, Pre-Prosecution and If it is related to the position of the Phase II Submission of the requested Minister of Law and Human Rights after the person to extradition. In such context, if issuance of Law Number 35 Year 1999, it is the Attorney judges there is still a clear that the position of the Minister of Justice deficiency in the result of examination and Human Rights in its current function has conducted by the Police in handling been very much different from its function as extradition cases, the Prosecutor shall regulated in Law Number 14 Year 1970 which return the file of the case to the Police for became the basis of preparation Law Number 1 completion by the Police as the procedure Year 1979. The fact that the role of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights is applicable in the Criminal Procedure Code. technically not in contact with the functions of Thus the 7 (seven) day period for the the judiciary and no longer a part of the Prosecutor to delegate the case of judicial authority clearly affects the accuracy extradition to the Court shall no longer be and accuracy of the Ministry of Law and counted since the Police hand over the Human Rights in assessing and considering the extradition case files, but shall be needs of law enforcement agencies related to calculated from the moment of the second the proof in court proceedings. phase of submission, namely the handover c) Case Files Research by the Prosecutor of liability to the person being requested In practice, although Law Number 1 Year for extradition.7 1979 only regulates the relationship Under these conditions, in the end between the Police and the Public there are two times of research on the Prosecution Service simply, but in the completeness of extradition documents, field, the coordination relationship namely: established between the Police and the 1. Extradition documents of extradition Prosecutor's Office in handling the cases conducted by the Ministry of

Justice and Human Rights 6 Article 11 paragraph (1) of Law no. 14 Year 1970: The bodies conducting the courts of this article paragraph 10 paragraph (1) organizational, administrative and financial are under the leadership of each department 7 Interview with Head od Denpasar District concerned. Attorney and Prosecutor at South Jakarta District Attorney.

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 85

2. If the Prosecutor considers that the in the Lim Yong Nam municipality is case file submitted by the Police in the complicated. Thus, the approval of the extradition case is still deficient, the President to continue the request for Prosecutor shall give instructions to extradition submitted by the United States the Police to immediately complete the Government (this is in accordance with file of the case, which in its Article 39 of the Extradition Act, must be implementation is coordinated through done since the United States does not have the Minister of Law and Human an extradition treaty with Indonesia) can Rights to be fulfilled by the requesting only be issued on March 20, 2015, which State. is almost 4 ) month Lim Yong Nam was 3. Pre-Trial of validity of detention in detained in Riau Islands Police. extradition cases. The submission and granting of a Law No. 1 of 1979 issued prior to the entry pre-trial petition for detention in an into force of the Criminal Procedure Code, extradition case clearly indicates a contains very little regulation of the rights paradigm shift in view of the provisions of of extradition requests in the extradition detention in Law No. 1 of 1979, namely examination process. The extradition law, that the process of extradition execution is on the other hand, does not govern the necessary by upholding respect for human rights of the extradition requester to file an rights including the conditions of detention objection against the forced action imposed as set out in the Criminal Procedure Code. on him in an extradition case, specifically Furthermore, another important on detention. message that can be captured from the In fact, in its Decision Number : 01 / judicial verdict on behalf of the extradition Pid.Pra / 2015 / PN.BTM dated April 20, applicant of Lim Yong Nam, indicates that 2015, the Batam District Court granted a the extradition detention process is pre-trial petition filed by the extradition considered to be no different from the requester Lim Yong Nam, who has been process of detention in the investigation or arrested and detained by the Riau Islands prosecution of ordinary criminal cases, Regional Police since October 24, 2014. which may be requested by a pre-trial Although Lim Yong Nam has been in examiner. This indicates that in reality, the detention since October 24, 2014, in reality Court considers the process of extradition the process of administrative examination execution subject to applicable criminal

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 86 procedure law, so that the provisions of an opinion which can be easily disregarded criminal procedural law can also be by the Government in deciding to approve applied in the process of extradition or deny an extradition request from other execution. countries. 4. Legal Efforts on Court Decision 5. Presidential Approval in Extradition By placing the Court Decision on the basis Cases of a statement or opinion, Law No. 1 of Law Number 1 Year 1979 stipulates that 1979 gives the executive (in this case the the process of extradition implementation Minister of Justice) the discretion to must be completed quickly, it can be choose whether or not to use the concluded from the provision of determination made by the Court. Elucidation of Article 36 Paragraph (4) Nevertheless, in its development, the that in view of the very strict time limit in paradigm that the determination of the the request of an extradition, the judge in the extradition case is only an Presidential Decree is taken in short opinion and therefore cannot be made a time.Although the Elucidation of Article legal effort began to change after on 17 36 Paragraph (4) states that given the very February 2014, the High Court of DKI strict time limits in the request of an Jakarta in its Decision number: 16 / Pid / extradition, the Presidential Decision must Plw / 2014 / PT.DKI granted the public be taken within a short period of time, but prosecutor's objection to the Stipulation of in reality the President's decision on the the South Jakarta District Court number: approval or rejection of the extradition 01 / Pid.C / Ekst / 2013 / PN.JKT.SEL request submitted by the requesting state dated July 11, 2013. in the case of after the issuing of the determination the extradition on behalf of SAYEED ABBAS court also took a long time. AZAD Bin SAYED ABDUL HAMID.8 Furthermore, the situation becomes The fact that the judgment of the even more confusing in terms of court in extradition cases may be tested by extradition requests submitted by countries a higher court through the mechanism of that do not yet have an extradition treaty justice proceedings indicates that the with Indonesia. Under the aforementioned position of the court of appeal in the conditions, according to Article 39 of Law extradition case can no longer be viewed as Number 1 Year 1979, before the extradition process can be forwarded to the 8 Data from South Jakarta District Attorney, obtained on April 2017.

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 87

Police or the Attorney for examination, the Minister of Justice shall first report the C. Ideal Concept of Legal Policies of request of extradition to the President with Extradition Execution in the Criminal Justice System of Foreign the consideration and consideration of the Jurisdictions Minister of Foreign Affairs regarding 1. Effectiveness of Central Authority whether or not the extradition request is Existence In Extradition Execution Process In Indonesia approved. Therefore, the provisions of Law The function of the central authority in the Number 1 Year 1979 which again re- implementation of extradition requests is requires the approval of the President in clearly different from the expected the final stages after the issuance of a court function in mutual assistance mechanisms decision is clearly a duplication of the in criminal matters. In the context of stipulation of the consent previously taken. extradition, the main function confronted 6. Extradition Execution Process in by a central authority in extradition Indonesia Capacity as Requesting mechanisms should be emphasized on the Country urgency of information provided by the In contrast to Indonesia's success in competent authorities of the country being extradition to perpetrators of crimes asked for extradition regarding the demanded by other countries, whether they completeness of the documents required to have extradition agreements or those who support the examination and verification do not have an extradition treaty, since the required in the criminal proceeding enactment of Law No. 1 of 1979, proceedings extradition. Indonesia's success in repatriating the The Authority of the Prosecutor The wanted criminals by Indonesia from the investigation of the extradition court files requesting country can be said to be very by the Prosecutor is logical considering small, which is recorded as 2 (two) people, that the Prosecutor actually appears in on behalf of Adrian Kiki Ariawan court proceedings to prove whether or not (requested extradition to the Australian a person can be extradited so that he can government in 2005 and submitted in late factually assess the adequacy of the 2013) and on behalf of Peter Walbran necessary documents in support of advance (requested extradition to the government proof trial. Australia in 2010 and submitted in 2011). The effectiveness of the prosecutor's

office as a focal point in the process of

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 88 extradition implementation is also felt Police on the basis of Red Notice more appropriately considering that as INTERPOL. In accordance with the spirit Officers are involved from the beginning of the Criminal Procedure Code, there is an to the end in the entire criminal justice obligation for the Police to immediately process, the Prosecutor's Office has access deliver the Notice of Commencement of to all components involved in the Investigation to the Public Prosecution extradition examination process, namely Service as a further form of control for the Police and Courts. Attorney Office in following the process of 2. Limitations of Detention Time in further handling of cases. Extradition Cases 3. The role of the Government in the In cases of extradition, restricted periods of Extradition Execution Process detention which may be exercised in the As a logical consequence of the purely process of extradition execution shall be of presidentil system in the Indonesian state particular importance, especially to those administration system after the amendment requested by extradition to undergo the of the 1945 Constitution9, the authority of allegations or allegations against which the the President as the holder of the highest requesting State is charged. Therefore power of state government in the context endless detention in the extradition process of establishing relations with other is clearly a form of punishment that must countries can be understood, especially be experienced by that person while in the when connected with the provisions of eyes of the law he must still be treated as Article 11 paragraph (1) of the 1945 an innocent person. Based on the above Constitution of 1945 governing the description, it is clear that the non- President with the consent of the People's regulation of the duration of detention in Legislative Assembly declaring war, with extradition cases as regulated in Law No. 1 other countries. of 1979 is felt to have been inconsistent with the principle of respect for Human 9 Rights adopted by KUHAP and ICCPR The system of government that is celebrated is presidential if :(a) the position of the which has been ratified by Indonesia. head of state is inseparable from the post of head of government; (b) the head of state is not accountable Furthermore, it is also important to to the parliament, but directly responsible to the president who elects him; (c) the president is refine the supervisory mechanism, otherwise not authorized to dissolve parliament; (d) the cabinet fully responsible to the president the especially on arrests or detentions by the holder of governmental power or as the highest administrator. Ibid. pg. 59

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 89

However, as a consequence of the treaty with Indonesia. According to the mandate of Article 11 Paragraph (3) of the author's opinion, it is felt appropriate if the 1945 Constitution which stipulates that task is entrusted to the Minister of Foreign further provisions on international treaties Affairs in accordance with its duties and shall be regulated by Law, then with the functions in the relationship of the state of issuance of Law Number 24 Year 2000 on Indonesia with other countries, both International Agreements, the power to bilaterally and multilaterally. The engage in an agreement with another State assignment of the duty to the Minister of attached to the President, in its Foreign Affairs is also deemed appropriate, implementation may be performed by the in view of the Government's decision to Minister of Foreign Affairs and other grant the extradition request from a Officials by a power of attorney. country that has not had an agreement with Instead. in the context of an Indonesia, may be used by the Minister of extradition request filed by a state that does Foreign Affairs in taking various not yet have an extradition treaty with diplomatic steps in defending the interests Indonesia, it is clear that there is an interest of the Indonesian state in the country on from the Government to assess whether the basis of the principle of reciprocity or such extradition request can be granted on reciprocal relationship. the basis of good relations and whether the interests of the Republic of Indonesia will. 3.Extradition as the Implementation of a Therefore, it is a logical thing to be able to Judgment of a Powerful Law Court process such extradition request as the As a logical consequence of applying the country which has already had extradition due process of law principle in the treaty with Indonesia, it is necessary to extradition case, Court ruling should be request prior approval from the President. placed as the final and final decision of a However, in view of the fact that at series of extradition examination processes the time of signing an extradition treaty that must be respected and upheld by all with another country, the President may be parties, including the State. In that context, represented by a Minister-level Official, the state and the extradition requested the same standard of approval of party must be placed in the position and extradition requests may be filed by a equal rights as the seeker of justice in the country that does not have an extradition extradition process. It is a logical

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 90 consequence of efforts to provide human extradition pekara which is not different rights protection in the implementation of from the stages of case handling process as the extradition process. Furthermore, by regulated in criminal procedure law, it is placing the Court Decision as the final necessary to affirm the concept of point and sole in the handling of the extradition as an integral part of the extradition case, it is clear that in the end enforcement process law so that the the extradition exercise in the form of the principle of due process of law can be extradition of extradition requests to the applied consequently in the process of requesting State shall be placed in the extradition implementation. context of the execution of a permanent, The reality of extradition implementation permanent court ruling, in which case the in the criminal justice system related to Prosecutor A Negarra official in foreign jurisdiction in Indonesia shows that accordance with his duties and functions as the position of the Minister of Law and stipulated in the criminal procedure law, as Human Rights as the Central Authority in the enforcement of a permanent legal court accepting,examining, giving consideration decision. and implementing the handover in the extradition execution has been inconsistent CONCLUSION with its capacity and function which is The provisions of Law No. 1 of more emphasized to the administration and 1979 which does not set strict time limits legal coaching and legislation. The fact on detention are no longer in line with the that extradition is an inseparable part of the development of the national criminal law enforcement process indicates that the justice system especially after the presence Central Authority should be submitted of the Criminal Procedure Code and the directly to law enforcement agencies so ratification of ICCPR by Indonesia, which that the reception and enforcement channel is a milestone of the principles of the function can be in one hand, for the sake of protection of Human Rights Humans in the acceleration and effectiveness of the criminal justice system in Indonesia. extradition exercise. Considering the purpose of extradition implementation as an effort to 1. The provisions of Law No. 1 of 1979 support law enforcement process and which does not set strictly limits on the related to examination process in ICCPR by Indonesia, which is a

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 91

milestone of the principles of the directly to law enforcement agencies so protection of Human Rights Humans in that the reception and enforcement the criminal justice system in Indonesia. channel functions can be in one hand, 2. Considering the purpose of extradition for the sake of acceleration and the implementation as an effort to support effectiveness of the extradition exercise. law enforcement process and related to examination process in extradition case BIBLIOGRAPHY which is not different from the stages of Abdussalam, H.R. (2006).Hukum Pidana Internasional, Jakarta: Restu case handling process as regulated in Agung. criminal procedure law, it is necessary Adji, Oemar Seno. (1980).Hukum-Hakim Pidana.Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga. to affirm the concept of extradition as ------, (1981).Hukum an integral part of the enforcement (Acara) Pidana Dalam Prospeksi, Second Edion. Jakarta: Erlangga.f process law so that the principle of due Afiah, Ratna Nurul. (1986). Praperadilan process can be implemented dan Ruang Lingkupnya. Jakarta: Akademika Press-indo. consequently in the process of Amnesty International. (2012). The Human extradition implementation. Rights Committee‘s New General Comment On The Right To Liberty 3. The reality of extradition And Security Of Person. London: implementation in the criminal justice Amnesty International Publications. Arief, Basrief, Kajian Kelembagaan system related to foreign jurisdiction in Kedudukan —Central Authority“ di Indonesia shows that the position of the Indonesia dalam Kerjasama Penanganan Perkara Pidana, Minister of Law and Human Rights as Makalah, Jakarta, Januari 2012 the Central Authority in accepting, Asikin, Zainal. (2012). Pengantar Ilmu Hukum. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo examining, giving consideration and Persada. implementing the handover in the Atmasasmita, Romli, (1996).Sistem Peradilan Pidana Perspektif extradition execution has has Eksistensialisme dan inconsistent with its capacity and Abolisionisme, Bandung: Bina Cipta. function which is more emphasized to ------. (2001). Hukum the administration and legal coaching Tentang Ekstradisi. Jakarta: PT Fikahati Aneska. and legislation. The fact that extradition ------. (2010).Sistem is an inseparable part of the law Peradilan Pidana Kontemporer. Jakarta: Kencana. enforcement process indicates that the Bantekas, Ilias and Susan Nash. (2007). Central Authority should be submitted International Criminal Law, Third

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 92

Edition, Riutledge-Candevish, Effendy, Marwan. (2005). Kejaksaan RI, United Kingdom. Posisi dan Fungsinya Dari Bassiouni, C. (1974). International Perspektif Hukum. Jakarta: PT Extradition and World Order. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Stijthoff International Publishing El-Ayouty, Yassin, et.al, (2000). Company. Government Ethics and Law Berman, Harold J. (ed.). (1996). Ceramah- Enforcement:Toward Global Ceramah Tentang Hukum Amerika Guidelines, Praeger Publishers. Serikat. Translate by Gregory Westport, USA. Churchill. Jakarta: PT. Tatanusa. Esmain Trans. (1968). History of Bradley, Craig M. (ed.). (2007). Criminal Continental Criminal Procedure. Procedure, a Worlds Wide Study, New York, N.Y: Augustus M. 2nd ed, Durham NC: Carolina Kelley. Academic Press. Falk, Richard. (1981). Human Rights and Broome, John. Transnational Crime in The State Sovereignty. New York: Twenty-First Century. Paper Holmes & Meier Publishers. presented in the Transnational Fowler, Michael Ross. (1995). Law, Crime Conference, orginized by the Power, and the Sovereign State:The Australian Institute of Criminology Evolution and Application of the in cooperation with the Australian Concept of Sovereignty. University Federal Ploce Force and Australia Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State Custom Service. March 2000. University Press. Canberra. Gilbert, Geoff. (2006). Responding to Buana, Mirza Satria. (2007). Hukum Intenational Crime. Leiden: Internasional Teori dan Praktek. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Bandung: Nusamedia. Grote, Ranier. (1994). Protection of Cranston, Maurice. (1973). What are Individual in the Pre-Trial Human Rights? Taplinger. New Procedure. David Weissbrodt & York. Rüdiger Wolfrum (eds.), The Right Csabafi, Imre Anthony. (1971). The To a Fair Trial, Springer, Berlin, Concept of State Jurisdiction in New York, Singapore, Tokyo. International Space Law, Leiden: Hamzah, Andi dan Irdan Dahlan. Martinus Nijhof Publishers. (1984).Perbandingan KUHAP HIR Devine, Carol, et.al. (1999). Human dan Komentar. Jakarta: Ghalia. Rights:The Essential Reference. Hamzah, Andi. (1994).Pelaksanaan Phoenix, USA: Oryx Press. Peradilan Pidana Berdasar Teori De Cruz, Peter. (2010). Perbandingan Dan Praktek, Penahanan- Sistem Hukum. Translate by Dakwaan-Requisitoir. Jakarta: Narulita Yusron, Jakarta: Nusa Rineka Cipta. Media/Diadit Media. ------. (2009). Hukum Acara Djajaatmadja, Bambang Iriana. (1992). Pidana Indonesia. Ed-2, cet-3, Pengantar Hukum Internasional, Jakarta Sinar Grafika,. Cetakan Pertama, Edisi ke-10. Hamzah, H. Bachtiar. (1997). Hukum Jakarta: Sinar Grafika. Internasional I. Medan: USU Press. Donnely, Jack. (2003). Universal Human Harahap, M. Yahya. (2002). Pembahasan Rights in Theory and Practice, Permasalahan Dan Penerapan Ithacaand London: Cornell KUHAP (Pemeriksaan Sidang University Press. Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi, dan

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 93

Peninjauan Kembali)“. Jakarta: Mauna, Boer.(2000).Hukum Internasional, Sinar Grafika. Pengertian Peranan Dan Fungsi ------. (2003). Pembahasan Dalam Era Dinamika Global. Permasalahan Dan Penerapan Bandung: PT Alumni. KUHAP (Penyidikan dan Mueller, Gerhard O.W. dan Fré Le Poole- Penuntutan). Jakarta: Sinar Griffiths. (1969). Comparative Grafika. Criminal Procedure. New York: Hatta, Moh. (2009). Beberapa Masalah New York University Press. Penegakan Hukum Pidana Umum Mujahidin, Ahmad. (2007). Peradilan Satu dan Pidana Khusus. Yogyakarta: Atap di Indonesia. Bandung: Refika Liberty. Aditam. Hulsman, L.H.C. (1984). Sistem Peradilan Muladi. (2005). Hak Asassi Manusia, Pidana Dalam Perspektif Hakekat, Konsep dan Implikasinya Perbandingan Hukum, translate by dalam Persepktif Hukum dan Soedjono D. Jakarta: Rajawali. Masyarakat. Bandung: Refika Kaligis, O.C., Rusdi Nurima, Deni Aditama. Kailimang. (1983). Praperadilan ------, Pemahaman HAM Dan Dalam Praktek. Jakarta: Erlangga.. Perkembangannya Dalam Rangka Kaligis, O.C. (2006).Perlindungan Hukum Memperkokoh Keutuhan NKRI Atas Tersangka, Terdakwa Dan Dan Mendukung Kemandirian Terpidana Dalam Sistem Peradilan Bangsa (Materi Kuliah Hukum Hak Pidana Indonesia. Bandung: Asasi Manusia, MIH UNDIP Alumni. Semarang) Karlen, Delmar, Geoffrey Sawer, dan Mulyadi, Lilik. (2007). Hukum Acara Edward M. Wise. (1967).Anglo- Pidana, Normatif, Teoritis Praktik American Criminal Justice. New dan Permasalahannya. Bandung: York : Oxford University Press. Alumni. Kusumaatmaja, Mochtar. (2002). Konsep Muslimin, H. Amrah, dkk.(1981). Hukum Dalam Pembangunan, Kumpulan Pidato-Pidato Bandung: Alumni. Pengukuhan, Beberapa Guru Besar LeGrande, James L. (1973). The Basic Berbicara Tentang Hukum dan Process of Criminal Justice, New Pendidikan Hukum, Bandung: York and Beverly Hills: Glencoe Alumni. Press. M, Dikdik, Arief Mansyur dan Elisatris Lubis, Todung Mulya. (2005). Jalan Gultom. (2007).Urgensi Panjang Hak Asasi Manusia. Perlindungan Korban Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Kejahatanantara Norma dan Mahfud MD. (2006). Membangun Politik Realita. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Hukum Menegakan Konstitusi. Persada. Jakarta: LP3ES. Nasution, Adnan Buyung.(1981). Bantuan Margolies, Daniel S. (2011). Spaces of Hukum di Indonesia, Jakarta: Law in American Foreign LP3ES. Relations: Extradition and Nasution, Faisal Akbar.(2009). Pemerintah Extraterritoriality in the Daerah dan Sumber-Sumber Borderlands and beyond, 1877- Pendapatan Asli Daerah. Jakarta: 1898. Athens, GA: University of Sofmedia. Georgia Press.

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 94

Nijboer, J.F., (2005). Comparative Terdakwa Dalam Pemeriksaan.2nd Criminal Law and Procedure. An ed. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia. Introduction. Kleuwer: Deventer. Rahardjo, Satjipto. (1981).Penegakan O.S. Hiariej, Eddy, (2009).Pengantar Hukum Suatu Tinjauan Sosiologis. Hukum Pidana Internasional, Jakarta: Sinar Baru. Jakarta: Erlangga. ------. (2003).Sisi-sisi lain Oppenheim, L., (1960).International Law dari hukum di Indonesia. Jakarta: A Treaties, 8 th edition, vol. On Buku Kompas. Peace. London: Longmans, Green Rahardjo, Satjipto. (2010).Penegakan & Co. hukum Progresif. Jakarta: Kompas. Packer, Herbert L. (1968). The Limits of Reksodiputro, Mardjono. (1994). Hak the Criminal Sanction, California: Asasi Dalam Sistem Peradilan Stanford Pidana. Buku Ketiga. Pusat Pangaribuan, Luhut M.P. (2009)Lay Pelayanan dan Pengabdian Hukum Judges & Hakim Ad Hoc, Suatu (d/h Lembaga Kriminologi) Studi Teoritis Mengenai Sistem Universitas Indonesia. Jakarta. Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Sabuan, Ansorie, Syarifuddin Pettanasse, Fakultas Hukum Pascasarjana Ruben Achmad. (1990).Hukum Universitas Indonesia/Papas Sinar Acara Pidana. Bandung: Angkasa. Sinanti. Jakarta. Santoso, Topo.(2000).Polisi dan Jaksa: Parthiana, I Wayan. (1990).Ekstradisi Keterpaduan atau Pergulatan?. Dalam Hukum Internasional dan Depok: Pusat Studi Peradilan Hukum Nasional Pidana Indonesia (Centre for Indonesia.Bandung: Mandar Maju. Indonesian criminal Justice ------, (2004). Hukum Studies). Pidana Internasional dan ------, 2012, —Suatu Tinjauan Ekstradisi, Bandung: Yrama Widy. Atas Efektivitas Pemidanaan“, ------,(2004).Ekstradisi Hukum Pidana dalam Perspektif, Dalam Hukum Internasional Agustinus Pohan , Topo Santoso, Modern.Bandung: Yrama Widy. Martin Moerings (ed), Edisi.1, Philpott, Daniel, (2001).Revolutions in Denpasar (Pustaka Larasan); Sovereignty:How Ideas Shaped Jakarta (Universitas Indonesia), Modern International Relation, Universitas Leiden, Universitas Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Groningen, Press. Sardjono. (1996).Kerjasama Internasional Poernomo, Bambang. (1988).Pola Dasar di Bidang Kepolisian, Jakarta: Teori dan Azas Umum Hukum NCB-Interpol. Acara Pidana.Yogyakarta: Penerbit Sarkar S.C. (1984). The Law of Criminal Libert. Procedure. 5 th ed. Rev. Prabhas S. Prasetyo, Teguh dan Abdul Halim Sarkar and Kshitis C. Ray. S.C. barkatullah. (2013).Filsafat, Teori Sarkar & Sons (Private) Ltd: Dan Ilmu Hukum,Pemikiran Calcutta.. Menuju Masyarakat Yang Setiardjo, Gunawan. (1993). Hak- Berkeadilan Dan Bermartabat. Hak Asasi Manusia Berdasarkan Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada. Ideologi Pancasila, Yogyakarta: Prodjohamidjojo, Martiman. Kanisius. (1984).Kedudukan Tersangka dan Shawn, Malcom Nathan.(1994).International

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 95

Law.Inggris. Cambridge University Tresna, R.(1977).Peradilan di Indonesia Press. dari Abad ke Abad. 2nd edition. Skinner, B.F. (2002). Operant Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita. Conditioning. B. F. Skinner Triatmojo, Sudibyo. (1982).Pelaksanaan Foundation. Penahanan Dan Kemungkinan Silaban, M.H. (1987).Kasasi. Upaya Yang Ada Dalam KUHAP. Hukum Acara Pidana. Jakarta: CV Bandung: Penerbit Alumni. Sumber Ilmu Jaya. United Nations Centre for Human Rights. Smith, Rhona K. (2008). Hukum Hak Asasi (1994).Human Rights and Pretrial Manusia. Yogyakarta: Pusat Studi Detention (A Handbook Of Hak Asasi Manusia UII. International Standards Relating Starke, JG. (1984).Introduction to To Pretrial Detention). Geneva: International Law, Butterworth, 9th United Nation Publications. ed. London. United Nations.(2004). United Nations Subekti, R. (1984).Perlindungan Hak Convention Against Transnational Asasi Manusia Dalam KUHAP. Organized Crime. Vienna: United Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita. Nations Office On Drugs And Sudarsono. (1991). Pengantar Ilmu Crime. Hukum. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta. United Nations, Eigth United Nations Sumartini, L. (1996).Pembahasan Congress on the Prevention of Perkembangan Hukum Nasional Crime and the Treatment of tentanng Hukum Acara Pidana. Offenders, Havana, Cuba 27 Jakarta: BPHN Depkehdan HAM August to 7 September 1990, RI. A/Conf.144/7, 26 July 1990 Surachman, RM. dan Jan S Maringka. United Nations Office on Drugs and (2014).Peran Jaksa dalam Sistem Crimes (UNODC). (2012).Manual Peradilan Pidana di Kawasan Asia on Mutual Legal Assistance and Pasifik.Jakarta: Sinar Grafika. Extradition.New York: United Susanto, Agus. (2014).Hukum, Moral dan Nations. Keadilan, Sebuah Kajian Filsafat Van Apeldoorn, L.J. (2001).Pengantar Hukum. Kencana Prenada. Jakarta: Ilmu Hukum. Jakarta: Pradnya Media Grup. Paramita. Surtiatmodjo. Wagley, John R. (2006).Transnational (1971).—Penangkapan Dan Organized Crime:Principal Threats Penahanan Di Indonesia“. Jakarta: and U.S. Responses, Congressional Pradnja Paramira. Research Service. USA: The Tak, Peter J.P. (ed), Tasks and Powers of Library of Congress. the Prosecutor Services in the EU Wetson, Paul B. & Kenneth M. Wells. Member States. Nijmegen. Wolf (1973).The Administration of Legal Publishers. Justice. 2nd ed., Inc, Englewood Tanusoebroto, S. (1983).Peranan Pra Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Peradilan Dalam Hukum Acara Wisnusubroto, Al. dan G.Widairtama. Pidana.Bandung: Alumni. (2005). Pembaruan Hukum Acara Thontowi, Jawahir dan Pranoto Iskandar. Pidana. Bandung:Citra Aditya (2006).Hukum Internasional Bakti. Kontemporer. Bandung: Refika Yayasan Pengembangan Hak Asasi Aditama. Manusia (HRRC). (2011). Rule of Law untuk Hak Asasi Manusia di

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 96

Kawasan ASEAN: Studi Data yang diselenggarakan FHUI, pada Awal. Jakarta. tanggal 6 Maret 1990 di Jakarta. Yee, Sienho (ed), (2001).International Law in the Post-Cold War World:Essays in Memory of Li Haopei, Routledge. London.

Balakrisnan, Subrahmania Iyer. Speedy and Fair Administration of Justice. UNAFEI Report. No. 15, November 1978. Mueller, Gerhard O. W., 1998, —Transnational Crime: Definitions and Concepts, Transnational Organized Crime vol. 4 Olii, Mohammad Irvan—Sempitnya Dunia, Luasnya Kejahatan? Sebuah Telaah Ringkas Tentang Transnational Crime“, Jurnal Kriminologi Indonesia Vol. 4 No. I September 2005 Philpott, Daniel, 1995, Sovereignty: An Introduction and Brief History, : Journal of International Affairs. Volume: 48, Columbia University School of International Public Affairs. Husein, Yunus, —Perspektif dan Upaya yang Dilakukan dalam Perjanjian Bantuan Timbal Balik Mengenai Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang“, (Makalah disampaikan pada —Seminar Tentang Bantuan Timbal Balik dalam Masalah Pidana yang diselenggarakan oleh BPHN pada tanggal 29- 30 Agustus 2006, di Bandung). Ramelan. —Pandangan Kejaksaan Tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Di Masa Depan.“ Makalah untuk Seminar Selapa Polri. 24 Juni 1999 Reksodiputro, Mardjono, —Hak-Hak Tersangka dan Terdakwa dalam KUHAP sebagai Bagian dari Hak- Hak Warga Negara (Civil Rights)“, (makalah yang disampaikan dalam seminar sehari tentang KUHAP

Pattimura Law Journal Vol.1 Issue 2, March 2017 | 97