Legal Opinion Concerning Money Laundering Letter of Denim

Abstract

Noni Zahara (the defendant) was not involved in the Narcotics Act and was not involved in the Money Laundering Act (TPPU). It means that it is not involved in violating Article 5, Article 10 of the TPPU Law. In connection with the determination of a person to be a suspect / defendant, in this case there has been an error in persona. The terms Error in Persona and Error in Objecto are used in court at the exception stage of a lawsuit (if in civil) or indictment (if convicted). The exception based on the Error in Persona was filed by the Defendant / Defendant against the Lawsuit / Indictment of the Plaintiff / Public Prosecutor because the indictment / lawsuit was addressed to the wrong person.) or the event / act that was charged. Then the mistake of the object being disputed / charged is called the Error in Object. In this case it must be held firm that: It is better to free one hundred guilty people than to convict an innocent person. In this case Noni Zahara was not involved in violating Article 5 and Article 10 of Law No. 8 of 2010 concerning Money Laundering Crimes. This means that Noni Zahara does not commit the crime of money laundering by accepting, or mastering the placement, transfer, payment, grants, donations, safekeeping, exchange, or using assets that he knows or deserves to be a criminal offense (Article 5 of the TPPU Law). If Noni Zahara does not know each other and is not included in a group of perpetrators of a Money Laundering Crime, then Noni Zahara cannot be said to have participated in conducting experiments, assistance, or evil agreements to commit a Money Laundering Crime, because they do not know each other so that they do not engage in an evil consensus, so that there is no mutual assistance in conducting the Money Laundering Act as regulated in Article 10 of Law No. 8 of 2010 concerning Money Laundering Crimes.