Policy Termination Of Alleged Crime Investigation In Polres Semarang

Police as investigators are authorized to terminate the investigation on the grounds as stated in Section 109 subsection (2) Criminal Procedure Code. In practice, there are crime that have been conducted the investigation found sufficient evidence and suspects, but in fact people who feel harmed (victim) had not wanted the case was brought to trial. This study aims to determine the termination of the investigation policy implementation alleged criminal act in Police Semarang, barriers faced by investigators in the implementation of the termination of the investigation alleged criminal act and analyze the implementation of the termination of the investigation policy alleged criminal act that should be implemented Police. The method used is the juridical sociological with descriptive analytical research specifications. The data used are primary data and secondary data and methods of data collection through field studies and literature. Data analysis method used is qualitative analysis. The results showed that the implementation of the policy of the termination of criminal case investigation in Police Semarang conducted through restorative justice as set out in the SE Chief of Police No. SE / 8 / VII / 2018 so it does not conflict with the provisions of the law. The obstacles faced by investigators in the implementation of the termination of criminal case investigation in Police Semarang consists of internal resistance and external obstacles. As for the implementation of the policy termination criminal case investigation should be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Police should be legislation that exists, procedural, professional, justice and uphold human rights. Reason for ending the termination of the investigation should be based on the existing Article 109 (2) Criminal Procedure Code and restorative justice with the procedures and provisions stipulated in SE Chief of Police No. SE / 8 / VII / 2018 and the Regulation No. 6 of 2019 concerning the Crime Investigation.Keywords: Termination Of Investigation; Alleged Criminal Act.�

Fade to Black? Exploring Policy Enactment and Termination Through the Rise and Fall of State Tax Incentives for the Motion Picture Industry

Policy termination has received less scholarly attention than policy diffusion, and empirical state-level studies that examine the rise and fall of the same policy are mostly absent from the literature. This study assesses the factors that led more than 45 states to enact and some to later repeal Motion Picture Incentive programs, a collection of tax incentives aimed at facilitating job creation and economic diversification. We find program enactments were driven by rising unemployment and national but not bordering state imitation. Falling unemployment and national trends drove subsequent terminations, but in many states, their impact was overwhelmed by the influence of incentive spending, which greatly reduced termination likelihood. These results not only shed light on policy enactments and terminations in general, but also inform scholarship on state tax incentives and the role of competitive factors in their creation and repeal—or lack thereof.

Research on Policy Change Based on Policy Process Theory—A Case on “Ban E-Bike” Policy in Guangzhou

Policy change includes policy innovation, policy succession, policy maintenance and policy termination, which involves result-orientation and process-orientation. The former focuses on scope and direction of policy change itself, and the latter are those factors affecting policy change. Based on policy process theory, multiple streams framework describes the pre-decisive process; advocate coalition and policy network theories explain interactive process from ideas and interests of different actors. Taking “ban e-bike” policy in Guangzhou as a case, to analyze why it arrived on government agenda by multiple streams framework, and explore policy process integrated advocacy coalition with policy network theory, could explain why the policy was repeatedly prohibited, why this policy change process was from single “ban riding” to more stringent “five bans”. Results show the reasons for policy maintenance and continuation that policy is inconsistent with relevant criteria, relative closed policy community, difficult to reconcile different beliefs between support-coalition and opposition-coalition, and lack interaction among network actors for differences in resource and power.