Judicial Review Trial on Act 8/1981 about Criminal Procedure Act (KUHAP) was held on Thursday (11/27). This time, Applicant’s attorney, Ardhian Hamdani and Fauzi Novaldi, were scheduled to deliver their revision as advised by the Panel in previous hearing.

“We have added to-be-reviewed norms […] we also add some changes related to the Court’s competencies, Applicant’s legal standing, conflicting Act to the Constitution and petitum,” Ardian said.

Meanwhile, Fauzi Novaldi explained that he has added object of the petition, as the petition has been revised it is now conveyed Article 7 paragraph (1) KUHAP. “Our objection is that the provision in Article 1 number 2 KUHAP failed to retain investigator’s authority in suspect accusation,” Fauzi said.

“The authority is neither explained in Article 7 paragraph (1) KUHAP, about how the investigator label suspect to certain person, this ambiguous norm opposes 1945 Constitution,” he added.

For the Applicant, authority to label suspect is failed to be explained in unison. Neither Act of Police, KPK, nor Prosecutor succeed to generate mutual assumption of suspect accusation. “For us, this is violating the Constitution,” Fauzi said.   

In the Justice Aswanto-led trial, Fauzi asked the implementation of the a quo norm to be postponed until verdict over the case being decided by the Court.  

Previously, it is known that the petition was filed because Applicant was specified as a suspect based on not valid decision and is not based on the law, because the determination of the suspect is not constituted by an unlawful act or authority abusing.(Winandriyo Kun)