LEGAL PROTECTION FOR MOVABLE PROPERTY BELONGING TO THIRD PARTIES IN FRAUDULENT OFFENSES

Abstract

This research aims to legally analyze the legal protection of third-party movable property in the crime of fraud, and the ownership status of third-party movable property in the crime of fraud after a final and binding court decision.
            This research utilizes the Theory of Justice linked to the values prevalent in society by Carl Joachim Friedrich, the Theory of Legal Protection linked to Human Rights by Satjipto Raharjo, and the Theory of Legal Certainty linked to the enforcement of norms or rules as guidelines by Peter Mahmud Marzuki.
            The method used is normative and doctrinal legal, prescriptive in nature with the Statute approach, Conceptual approach, and Case approach, namely District Court Decision Banjarmasin Number: 757/Pid.Sus/2019/PN Bjm dated December 19, 2019, and Banjarmasin High Court Decision Number 114/PID/2019/PT BJM dated January 30, 2020; District Court Decision Kepanjen Number: 850/Pid.Sus/2010/PN. Kpj dated January 3, 2011, and District Court Decision Sumbawa Besar Number: 247/Pid.B/2006/PN.Sbb, dated December 28, 2006.
            Previous research by: 1. Afif Januarsyah Saleh, 2013, thesis, Legal Protection for Third Parties in Recovering Their Goods Confiscated in Criminal Acts, Analysis: legal protection for third parties in recovering their goods confiscated in criminal acts; legal consequences if the judge in a criminal judgment does not return the third party's property; How should the criminal justice system regulate legal protection for third parties? 2. Lukman Hakim, 2021, dissertation, Legal Protection of Third-Party Evidence in Good Faith in Corruption Cases at the Prosecution Stage. Analysis: the connection between third parties acting in good faith in the investigation, prosecution, and sentencing processes of corruption cases; the legal steps taken by third parties acting in good faith to defend their property rights that are subject to seizure during the investigation phase and the decision of the Corruption Court declaring the evidence confiscated for the state; formulating an ideal legal concept to provide legal protection to third parties acting in good faith regarding their property rights that are subject to seizure during the investigation phase and the evidence in the prosecution hearing. The difference with the author relates to the criminal acts of fraud and the movable objects that are the subject of the research.
            The research results indicate that the provisions in the Criminal Procedure Code and related regulations still do not provide optimal legal protection for third parties. This is evident from inconsistent court decisions in determining the ownership status of third-party movable property. Additionally, this research found that legal rule ambiguity can lead to legal uncertainty and potentially violate the principle of justice. Therefore, it is necessary to reformulate legal policies to provide more assertive and fair protection for third parties in cases of fraudulent criminal acts.