Attorneys for the Petitioners following the judicial review hearing of Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedural Code (KUHAP), Monday (11/11) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the second judicial review hearing of Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedural Code (KUHAP) on Monday (11/11/2019). Constitutional Justices I Dewa Gede Palguna (panel chairman), Wahiduddin Adams and Enny Nurbaningsih (members) were on the bench to hear the case No. 60/PUU-XVII/2019.

The hearing had been scheduled to hear the revised petition, but the Petitioners had decided to withdraw the petition. "Actually the agenda [for today] was the petition revision. However, we received a letter from the Petitioners\' attorneys dated November 11, 2019 [stating] that the Petitioners withdrew the petition. Is that correct?” asked Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna to the Petitioners\' legal team.

One of the attorneys Y. B. Christian Putro Soewandi confirmed the statement. "Therefore, you officially withdrew the petition and it is your right. In accordance with the procedural law for the judicial review against the Constitution, this is indeed possible," Justice Palguna said.

Petitioners Andrias Lutfi Susiyanto and Evan Waluyo Rostanadji had previously challenged Article 109 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code because it does not explain in detail the deadline of investigation conducted by investigators. If the investigation deadline has passed, investigators are legally obliged to stop the investigation.

Andrias Lutfi Susiyanto, a teacher of the private school SD Taman Harapan, was declared a suspect for violating Article 335 of KUHAP. The incident started with an argument between the teachers SD Taman Harapan, including the Petitioner, and the legal team of the school’s former principal. The argument led to the Petitioner being reported to the criminal detective unit (Satreskrim) of the subprecinct police (Polsek) of Klojen, Malang City in January 2018. However, until now the investigation dossier has not been handed over to the public prosecutor. The Petitioners believe this caused legal uncertainty that harmed the Petitioner\'s constitutional rights

Meanwhile, Evan Waluyo Rostanadji, an employee at Amolongo gold shop, had been arrested by the Satreskrim of Mimika precinct police (Polres) and then declared a suspect on December 19, 2018. He had been in custody for 120 days, but the dossier has not been handed over to the public prosecutor. Until the petition was filed, the Petitioner had not received any information on the progress of that case, leading to legal uncertainty that harmed the Petitioner\'s constitutional rights.

Therefore, in their petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Constitutional Court declare the articles unconstitutional for not including and explaining in detail the deadline for investigations conducted by investigators. (Nano Tresna Arfana/NRA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti