Loopholes in the law (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Implementation of the Juvenile Justice System in Terrorism: Indonesia Case
Jurnal Kajian Pembaruan Hukum
ABSTRACT: This research aims to review the right to child protection as well as the implementation of the Juvenile Criminal Justice System (SPPA) based on court rulings. Behind the research is concern about the increasing number of children involved in terrorist networks in Indonesia. Some of them have been sentenced to prison for terrorism plots. The implementation of the SPPA Act and the PA Act has become a reference for law enforcement in addition to counter-terrorism legislation. The crime of terrorism is a crime that must be addressed immediately because it threatens the state, but the state remains obliged to ensure the fulfillment of the right to child protection during the judicial process with special protection. With the involvement of a child that is in relevance to the child protection act, it is a complex matter that needs to be resolved with a special analysis of law, due to its nature. This study examines court rulings with normative juridical methods to get significa...
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), 2022
Terrorism is a special type of crime, in recent cases terrorism crimes in Indonesia often involve minors in carrying out acts of terror, such as the terrorism case in Surabaya some time ago. By involving children in a criminal act of terrorism, a special treatment is needed for children who are perpetrators of criminal acts of terrorism, because children who are perpetrators of criminal acts of terrorism cannot be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. The special handling in the 2012 SPPA Law and the 2018 Anti-Terrorism Law can be in the form of rehabilitation which is one part of diversion, and deradicalization which is a program of the BNPT. Rehabilitation and deradicalization even though they have the same goal, namely an improvement for children who are perpetrators of terrorism, the two programs have several differences where deradicalization includes programs that are more specific for handling and repairing children who are perpetrators of terrorism crimes such as guidance on national insight, guidance on religious insight, as well as several cooperation programs with various related parties to carry out this deradicalization program, while the social rehabilitation program in the 2012 SPPA Law conducted by LPKS programs is more aimed at general crimes, this is because the programs that found in social rehabilitation is more of a vocational nature and talent development for children. Meanwhile, in handling cases of criminal acts of terrorism, a special treatment is needed to eliminate radical thoughts in children who are perpetrators of terrorism.
Some Legal Aspects of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act
BRICS Law Journal
Following the lead of the U.S. Senate on May 17, 2016, the House of Representatives of the United States of America unanimously adopted the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which will allow victims of terrorism to bring class actions against any state directly or indirectly involved in terrorist acts against American citizens. U.S. president Barack Obama attempted to impose his veto against this legislation, but was overridden by both houses in September, 2016. As a result, the Act entered into law, risking a real revolution in international law with potentially very serious political consequences. While it may be anticipated that those countries directly complicit in terrorism will see their assetsincluding their sovereign assets in the United Statesseized to finance the compensation of the victims, such prosecutions will undoubtedly also involve European countries, many of which have themselves been targeted by terrorism. This is especially likely when their nationals are involved in terrorist acts. There is now a great risk that U.S. law will unilaterally modify several fundamental principles of international law, such as the sovereign immunity of states, creating genuine legal conflict in which victims of terrorism will seek redress from all states, including allied nations or countries that have themselves been victims of terror.
Definition of Terrorism and its Impact on Criminal Justice System: A Critical Review
2022
Terrorism in Pakistan has various manifestations, which includes sectarian, ethnic, religious, and political hues. The decade of 1990 was marked by sectarian terrorism in Pakistan. The history of previous laws on terrorism showed that the first ever law on terrorism; the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act was introduced in 1975, which did not have any definition of the term terrorism, however, it was followed by a few other laws promulgated from time to time, depending on the situations. Nevertheless, Anti-Terrorism Act was promulgated in 1997, in which terrorism was defined as per law, for the very first time in the history of Pakistan. The Act was amended many times to date. There are, however, a few flaws in the definition of terrorism in ATA, 1997; which severely impacted the criminal justice system of Pakistan. Police misuse ATA and registered cases under this law to increase the gravity of this issues, which resulted in the increase of workload on special courts, leading to delays in the dispensation of justice. The prosecution was never independent, as it was envisaged to be. They do not have an active role to play in the cases, while at the time of registration of FIRs, during investigations bringing forth witnesses and forensic evidence before the courts was the prime concern of the prosecutions. There was no regular and effective coordination between all three components of the criminal justice system of Pakistan at the top level. Due to faulty or fake FIRs, due to the absence of witnesses, faulty investigation, and sometimes judicial corruption; the courts dismiss the cases. Thereby, mostly the nominated culprits are released on the orders of the courts. In this scenario, there is a dire need to amend the definition of terrorism in ATA, 1997.
Anti Terrorism IIUM Law Journal
Malaysia has proactively introduced a legal framework for combating terrorism financing within its shores in a phenomenal response to the global war against terrorism. Against this backdrop, this paper explores the provisions relating to antiterrorism financing in the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 (AMLATFA) plus the recent amendment made to the Act in 2014, as well as the Penal Code of Malaysia. The significance of this study is seen in exposing the recent development on the Anti-Terrorism Financing Laws in Malaysia particularly with respect to the recent amendment made to the Act in 2014. While this study focuses on Anti-Terrorism Laws in Malaysia, AMLATFA forms the crux of the discussion. The paper concludes that Malaysia is keeping up with the global development on Anti-Terrorism Financing laws and this helps it maintain good image in the global world as a country that is ready to combat terrorism generally and terrorism financing specifically.
LIGAHUKUM
To protect its citizens specifically children, the government has issued Child Protection Law No. 23 of 2002 which includes article 59 of the law. The question asked is whether it is possible for children involved in criminal acts of terrorism to be convicted, as well as what forms of legal protection for children participating in acts of terrorism based on the Child Protection Act. The research method used by the author is Normative juridical, research-based on data sources consisting of applicable regulations, court decisions, journals, or articles - theories and theories as well as legal concepts and views of legal scholars' answers by analyzing each answer given other. Analysis of children participating in criminal acts uses data from the Criminal Code which is then presented by the power of thought of the author. The results of this study can be seen through children involved in criminal acts of terrorism that cannot be convicted and forms of legal protection for children w...
Terrorist Precursor Offences: Evaluating the Law in Practice
Criminal Law Review, 2020
The Terrorism Acts of 2000 and 2006 created a suite of new precursor offences related to terrorism. This article critically evaluates these provisions in light of how they have been interpreted and applied in practice. It focuses on three especially important offences: preparing acts of terrorism, disseminating terrorist publications, and collecting information of a kind likely to be useful to a terrorist. All three offences, it is concluded, have proved to be problematically broad in their scope, and to some extent avoidably so. Notable problems include the offences' extension to conduct that carries little to no real risk of contributing to future terrorist attacks, their implications for innocent or even positively valuable conduct, and their likely consequent chilling effects on suspect communities. Suggestions are considered as to how these concerns might be addressed, while still respecting the offences' underlying purpose and arguable principled core.
Analysis of Acts of Terrorism under the Nigerian Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011 (as amended)
2018
ABSTRACT The spate of security breaches in recent times aside the Boko-Haram quagmire resulting in attacks, killings and the coordinated manners by which these were carried out, necessitates this research. The research therefore is on: 'Analysis of Acts of Terrorism under the Nigerian Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011 and Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) hereafter referred to as TPA, 2011 (as amended). The research is restricted to analysis of acts that are deemed to constitute terrorism offences under the TPA, 2011 (as amended). However, the analysis with respect to these acts is limited to inchoate acts of terrorism, strict liability offences and acts of terrorism that require mental fault, for liabilities to arise. The nature of the analysis as regards these delineated areas is done in such ways as to identify these acts, determine what is to be established and how it is to be established for liability to arise where any acts of terrorism is committed. In the course of carrying out this research it is found that: The judge while sentencing has the discretionary power with respect to terms of imprisonment as regards some offences. It is discovered also that the Act mainly provides for and punishes inchoate offences of terrorism, strict liability offences of terrorism and offences requiring prove of mental fault. The research recommends that Section 2 of the TPA 2011 (as amended) should be amended as to either empower the Council of States to advice President to make good the power of application where it is shown that the executive is relaxed in exercise of such for the proscription of an organization as that of terror where situation so demands or alternatively, empower a private individual to apply to a Judge in Chambers showing convincing reasons why he should proscribe an organisation. Also, there should be a designated section defining parties to acts of terrorism and proscribing punishment for their acts considering the network involved in the commission of an act of terrorism.