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.
Artikel Terkait
- 12/05/2015 KUHAP, Court Reform Needed to Uphold Justice and Legal System, Activists Say
- 28/04/2015 ICJR Apresiasi Putusan MK yang Memperluas Objek Praperadilan
- 19/04/2015 Supreme Court to Review Its Own Regulation. Civil Society has filed judicial review petition on the Supreme Court Circular Letter on the Limitation of Case Review Application Submission at the Supreme Court
- 23/02/2015 ICJR : Sebagai Judex Juris, MA Harus Berikan Kepastian Hukum Dalam Putusan Praperadilan Budi Gunawan
- 16/02/2015 Tiga Langkah yang Dilakukan oleh KPK Pasca Putusan Praperadilan BG
Related Articles
ICJR : Kasus Kaesang Pangarep Tak Perlu Dilanjutkan
Memproses kasus seperti ini akan memberikan anggapan bahwa seluruh bentuk kritik dan ekspresi bisa dianggap sebagai ujaran kebencian dan perlu
Constitutional Court Rejected the Petition for a Judicial Review of Article 284, paragraph (1), paragraph (2), paragraph (3), paragraph (4) and paragraph (5), Article 285 and Article 292 of the Indonesian Criminal Code
In Decision No. 46/PUU-XIV/2016 dated 14 December 2017, the Constitutional Court rejected Case No. 46/PUU-XIV/2016 on a Judicial Review of
Kasus Pengeroyokan Anak Korban Kekerasan Seksual di Malang: Lingkaran Setan Tabunya Pendidikan Kesetaraan Gender dan Hak Kesehatan Seksual Reproduksi
Polresta Malang Kota mengamankan 10 anak di bawah umur, terduga pelaku perkosaan dan kekerasan terhadap Melati (nama samaran), siswi sekolah