ICJR Appreciates the Constitutional Court Decision for Broadening the Ambit of Pretrial Hearing

Institute for Criminal justice Reform (ICJR) welcome the recent Decision No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 rendered by the Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi/MK) in broadening the object matter that can be heard by pretrial hearing (Praperadilan), including the act of investigator in naming of a person as a suspect and searching and seizing evidence in criminal cases. This decision has expanded the ambit of pretrial hearing which previously only served to challenge the investigator act in arresting, detaining, or terminating the investigation or prosecution process.

ICJR believed that through the its decision, MK has successfully involved in reforming the face of Indonesian criminal justice system and overcome the legal uncertainty over the debate on whether the determination of a person as suspect can be challenged in pretrial forum.

Besides broadening the ambit of pretrial hearing, MK is also redefined that standard of evidence of phases preliminary evidence (bukti permulaan), sufficient preliminary evidence (bukti permulaan yang cukup), and sufficient evidence (bukti yang cukup) that is regulated under the Indonesian Criminal Procedural Code (KUHAP). MK imposes obligation to the investigators to have at least two items of valid evidence (dua alat bukti yang sah) and examination of the alleged person as requirement to satisfy the standard of “preliminary evidence”, “sufficient preliminary evidence”, and “sufficient evidence” in KUHAP.

ICJR urged for every person that has been treated unfairly and named as suspect through abuse of power by investigators to challenge such act before the pretrial hearing. Moreover, ICJR also reminded the Supreme Court to regulate the procedure law of pretrial hearing for it can be implemented in efficient and organized manner.



Related Articles

Menggugat Pengaturan Praperadilan

Pengujian Pasal 82 ayat (1) huruf b, huruf c, dan huruf d UU No 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara

The Case of Yusman Telaumbanua, Prove of Weak Fair Trial in Death Penalty

This case is a factual evidence that the Juvenile Justice Law (UU SPPA) is not properly implemented, Children Rights are

Pidana Penghinaan Tidak Tepat Digunakan Dalam Konflik Romli-ICW

Pada Kamis 21 Mei 2015, Guru Besar Fakultas Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran Prof. Romli Atmasasmita melaporkan Wakil Koordinator Badan Pekerja Indonesia