Volume 07 Issue 10 October 2024
1Nanda Irna Devi Chaniago, 2Joko Setiyono
1,2Universitas Diponegoro Semarang
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i10-27Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
Pretrial authority underwent changes in authority through the Constitutional Court Decision. This research aims to examine and analyze several judicial reviews of pretrial objects, consisting of Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, Constitutional Court Decision Number 109/PUU-XIII/2015, Constitutional Court Decision Number 102/PUU-XIII/ 2015 & Constitutional Court Decision Number 130/PUU-XIII/2015, which as a whole, the a quo decision changes pre-trial authority. The formulation of the problem in this research is 1). What is the role of the Constitutional Court in making legal breakthroughs regarding pretrial? 2). What are the dynamics and issues behind the Constitutional Court's decision in changing pre-trial authority? The research method used in this research uses doctrinal legal research methodology. This research concludes that: 1). The role of the Constitutional Court in making legal breakthroughs regarding pre-trial can be seen in, first: the Constitutional Court determines that the determination of suspects is included in the object of pre-trial. Second: The Constitutional Court limits the scope of pre-trial material law to the position of KPK investigators which cannot be equated with POLRI investigators, that KPK investigators stand alone with Law no. 30 of 2003 as amended in Law no. 19 of 2019 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission. Third: ending the multiple interpretations of judges, discontinuing pre-trial applications when the case has been examined or entered the main case. Fourth: the submission of a notification letter for the start of an investigation is extended not only to the public prosecutor, but also to the suspect and the reporter/victim. 2). The dynamics and issues behind the Constitutional Court's decision in changing pre-trial authority, namely related to pre-trial authority in determining suspects, the dismissal of pre-trial petitions, the submission of SPDP, the entire Constitutional Court's decision has not been followed up in the form of a revision of the law
KEYWORDS:Amendment; Authority; Pretrial; Through; Decision; Constitusional Court.
REFERENCES1) Akbar, Muhammad Fatahillah. “Pengaruh Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi di Bidang Pengujian UndangUndang terhadap Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia dengan Perubahan KUHAP.” Jurnal Konstitusi, Vol. 16, no. 3, (September 2019).
2) Alfitra. “Disparitas Putusan Praperadilan Dalam Penetapan Tersangka Korupsi Oleh KPK.” Jurnal Cita Hukum, Vol. 4, no. 1, (2016).
3) Ananda, Fitria. “Perluasan Objek Praperadilan dalam Penetapan Tersangka berdasarkan Asas Keadilan Bagi Pelapor.” Badamai Law Journal, Vol. 9, no. 1, (2024).
4) Aprilia, Sal Sabila, Elizabeth Siregar, dan Tri Imam Munandar. “Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Hak Tersangka Melalui Upaya Praperadilan.” Pampas: Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 4, no. 1, (2023).
5) Asriyani, Arini, dan Asti Dwiyanti. “Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Sistem Peradilan Indonesia.” Julia: Jurnal Litigasi Amsir, Vol. 10, no. 4, (Agustus 2023).
6) Dharmo, Abadi B. “Relevan Pemeriksaan Praperadilan Menjadi Gugur Apabila Perkara Pokok Sudah Mulai Diperiksa.” Jurnal Legalitas, Vol. 2, no. 1, (Juni 2012).
7) Ery Agus Priyono, Bahan Kuliah Metodologi Penelitian, Program Studi Magister Kenotariatan Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, 2003/2004.
8) Fani, Ryan. “Urgensi Lembaga Praperadilan di Negara Indonesia Sebagai Lembaga Tetap yang Wajib Melakukan Pemeriksaan Pendahuluan Sebelum Perkara dilimpahkan Ke Pengadilan.” Wacana Pramarta Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vol. 20, no. 4, (2021).
9) Fitria Esfandiari, Jazim Hamidi & Moh. Fadli, Positive Legislature Mahkamah Konstitusi di Indonesia, Dissertasi, Universitas Brawijaya, (2014).
10) Hartono, Dodik. “Peranan dan Fungsi Praperadilan dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana di Polda Jateng.” JDH: Jurnal Daulta Hukum, Vol. 1, no. 1, (Maret 2018).
11) Kansil, Christine S.T., dan Putri Meilika Nadilatasya. “Dampak Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Dinamika Politik dan Kepercayaan Publik di Indonesia: Analisis Implikasi Hukum dan Etika.” Unes Law Review, Vol. 6, no. 4 (Juni 2024).
12) Kripsiaji, Dinar, dan Nur Basuki Minarno. “Perluasan Kewenangan Dan Penegakan Hukum Praperadilan Di Indonesia Dan Belanda.” Al-Mazaahib: Jurnal Perbandingan Hukum, Vol. 10, no. 1, (Juni 2022).
13) Kusfitono, Umar Ma’ruf, dan Sri Kusriyah. “Implementasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 130/PUU-XIII/2015 Terhadap Proses Penyidikan Tindak Pidana Pencurian Dengan Pemberatan Di Sat Reskrim Polres Kendal.” Jurnal Hukum Khaira UMMAH, Vol. 15, no. 1, (Maret 2020).
14) Muntaha. “Pengaturan Praperadilan dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia.” Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, Vol. 29, no. 3, (Oktober 2017).
15) Nata, Akbar Raga, dan Muhammad Rifki Ramadhani Baskoro. “Analisis Dampak Putusan Hakim Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Putusan MK Nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023.” Jurnal Sanskara Hukum dan HAM, Vol. 2, no. 2, (Desember 2023).
16) Nur, Efa Rodiah. “Eksistensi Praperadilan Bagi Penegakan Hukum Dalam Mencapai Keadilan Substansif di Indonesia.” Jurnal Asas, Vol. 9, no. 2, (Juli 2017).
17) Pratama, Muhammad Zikril. “Analisis Yuridis Tentang Tindak Lanjut Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Berdasarkan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan.” UNJA Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 1, no. 2, (Juni 2023).
18) Roringko, Juhaidy Rizaldy. “Praperadilan Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014.” Jurnal Lex Administratum, Vol. 8, no. 2, (Juni 2019).
19) Saputr, Trias, dan Jatarda Mauli Hutagalung. “Pentingnya Surat Pemberitahuan Dimulainya Penyidikan (Spdp) Bagi Para Pihak Demi Terciptanya Due Proces Of Law.” IBLAM Law Review, Vol. 2, no. 2, (2022).
20) Sari, Adena Fitri Puspita, dan Purwono Sungkono Raharjo. “Mahkamah Konstitusi Sebagai Negative Legislator dan Positif Legislastor.” Souvereignty: Jurnal Demokrasi dan Ketahanan Nasional, Vol. 1, no. 1, (2022).
21) Septiani, Elya Wulan, Maida Kartika, dan Riki Aldiansyah. “Membangun Kesadaran Berkonstitusi Sebagai Upaya Menegakkan Hukum Konstitusi, Siyasah Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara.” Siyasah Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara, Vol. 1, no. 1, (2021).
22) Sihombing, Eka N.A.M, dan Cynthia Hadita. “Bentuk Ideal Tindak Lanjut Atas Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang.” Jurnal APHTN-HAN, Vol. 1, no. 1, (Januari 2022).
23) Siregar, Muhammad Yusuf, dan Zainal Abidin Pakpahan. “Kewenangan Mengajukan Pra Peradilan Atas Penetapan Tersangka Di Tinjau Dari Segi Hukum.” Jurnal Ilmiah Advokasi, Vol. 6, no. 2, (September 2018).
24) Suptantio, Steven. “Daya Ikat Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Tentang ‘Testimonium De Auditu’ Dalam Peradilan Pidana.” Jurnal Yudisial, Vol. 7, no. 1, (April 2014).
25) Wicaksana, Abraham Gunawan. “Rekonstruksi Ruang Lingkup Kewenangan Praperadilan Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia.” Jurnal Magister Hukum Perspektif, 10, no. 2, (Oktober 2019).
26) Wulandari, S. “Kajian Tentang Praperadilan dalam Hukum Pidana.” Jurnal Ilmiah UNTAG Semarang, Vol. 4, no. 3, (2015).
27) Wulandari, Widati, Nella Sumika Putri, Wanodyo Sulistyani, dan Erika Magdalena Chandra. “Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi: Dampaknya terhadap Perubahan Undang-Undang dan Penegakan Hukum Pidana.” Jurnal Konstitusi, Vol. 18, no. 3, (September 2021).
