Image Source : https://www.freepik.com/premium-vector/bad-policeman-officer-cop-character-arrestinterrogatessuspect_12861406.htm?epik=dj0yJnU9UUhXMEVwV2RTR1ZzOHo2Tmt3andsLXhITmFHa191WmcmcD0wJm49MHB5QXgxdTRUZkZFTTJweU5BcGM1ZyZ0PUFBQUFBR2FqV3pZ
From: A.M Oktarina Counsellors at Law
Contributors: Pramudya Yudhatam, S.H., Muhammad Ardin Ardiansyah,S.H.
Reviewer: Noverizky Tri Putra Pasaribu, S.H., L.L.M (Adv).
A. Background
A pre-trial decision is a legal remedy that can be filed by a suspect, their family, or their legal representative in the law enforcement process in Indonesia. The purpose of a pre-trial is to examine the legality of an arrest, detention, termination of investigation or prosecution, and to seek compensation and rehabilitation for someone who feels their rights have been violated during the legal process. In pre-trial case number 10/Pid.Pra/2024/Pengadilan Negeri Bandung, with the respondent Pegi Setiawan, there are several legal aspects that need to be analyzed to understand the decision moreover its became a trending topic in the mass media as reported by the BBC with the title ” Pegi Setiawan bebas, hakim menyatakan penetapan tersangka dalam kasus Vina ‘tidak sah dan batal demi hukum – Polisi diperintahkan pulihkan nama baik Pegi” which was published on July 2, 2024 (as the link attached) This raises the subsequent question: how should this decision be interpreted?
B. Legal Basis
1. The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (“UUD NRI 1945”)
2. Law Number 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (“KUHAP”)
3. Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 of 2016 on the Prohibition of Reconsideration of Pre-Trial Decisions. (“Perma 4/2016“)
In the pre-trial decision number 10/Pid.Pra/2024/Pengadilan Negeri Bandung, the judge ruled that the arrest and detention of Pegi Setiawan were legally invalid. This decision was based on several legal considerations, including:
Article 1 point 10 of KUHAP:
“Pre-trial is the authority of the district court to examine and decide in the manner regulated in this law, concerning:
a. the legality or illegality of an arrest or detention upon petition of the suspect or their family or another party on behalf of the suspect;
b. the legality or illegality of the termination of an investigation or prosecution upon petition for the sake of upholding law and justice;
c. a petition for compensation or rehabilitation by a suspect or their family or another party on their behalf whose case is not submitted to the court.”
Article 2 paragraph (3) of Perma 4/2016:
“(3) A pre-trial decision that grants a petition regarding the illegality of the suspect’s designation does not nullify the Investigator’s authority to designate the person as a suspect again after meeting at least two new valid pieces of evidence, different from the previous evidence related to the matter of the case.”
In the pre-trial case number 10/Pid.Pra/2024/Pengadilan Negeri Bandung, Pegi Setiawan filed a petition to revoke his suspect status designated by the investigator. The Bandung District Court decided to grant the petition with the following legal considerations:
1. Compliance with the Legal Procedure for Suspect Designation
The court found that the designation of Pegi Setiawan as a suspect did not comply with the prevailing legal procedures. Based on Article 77 of KUHAP, the designation of a suspect must be based on sufficient preliminary evidence. In this case, the investigator failed to present sufficient preliminary evidence to designate Pegi Setiawan as a suspect.
2. Human Rights of the Suspect
The decision also considered the human rights of the suspect as stipulated in Article 28D paragraph (1) of UUD NRI 1945, which states that every person has the right to recognition, guarantees, protection, and fair legal certainty as well as equal treatment before the law. The designation of a suspect without sufficient evidence was deemed to violate these human rights.
3. Upholding the Principle of Legality
The court emphasized the importance of the principle of legality in the law enforcement process. Investigators are required to comply with the provisions of the prevailing laws at every stage of the investigation. In this case, the investigator did not adhere to the legal procedures outlined in KUHAP, rendering the suspect designation invalid.
C. Conclusion
The pre-trial decision number 10/Pid.Pra/2024/Pengadilan Negeri Bandung, which revoked the suspect status of Pegi Setiawan, provides an important lesson on fair and lawful law enforcement. This decision affirms that the designation of a suspect must be based on sufficient preliminary evidence and comply with the prevailing legal provisions. The human rights of suspects must be protected, and the principle of legality must be upheld at every stage of the law enforcement process. The interpretation of this decision provides guidance for law enforcement officials to always act in accordance with existing regulations, ensuring legal certainty and fair treatment for all citizens.
References:
• https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/articles/c97dl9qx4glo
For further information, please call:
– partner@amoktarina.co
– n.pasaribu@amoktarina.co
– 0817779122