---

Principal Petitioner Ibnu Fajar Rahim after preliminary examination hearing of the judicial review of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), Thursday (13/2) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Gani.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—Article 72 and Article 143 paragraph (4) of Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) makes the Petitioners, Indonesian citizens who could potentially become suspects or defendants at any time, to have no legal certainty over whether the provision of dossiers of the suspects or defendants is a negative right, which is a right at the request of the suspects or defendants, or an obligation for the public prosecutor. The statement was delivered by Ibnu Fajar Rahim, one of the Petitioners in case No. 12/PUU-XVIII/2020 on Thursday (13/2/2020) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court.

Ibnu Fajar Rahim and the other Petitioners Sandhy Handika and Danang Yudha Prawira argued that Article 143 paragraph (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code and its elucidation state that for every case delegated by a public prosecutor to a court, at the same time the public prosecutor is obliged to provide a case transfer letter, indictment, and dossier to the suspect or their attorney or legal counsel and investigators for all types of cases.

"Meanwhile, Article 72 of the KUHAP and its elucidation principally state the suspect or legal counsel\'s right to request investigation report copy of the suspect at the investigation level, dossier, and indictment at the prosecution level, as well as dossier including judge\'s ruling at the examination level at the court," Ibnu Fajar said. .

If Article 72 and of the Criminal Procedure Code and its elucidation are connected with Article 143 paragraph (4) and of the Criminal Procedure Code and its elucidation, according to the Petitioners, there is an antinomy between Article 143 paragraph (4) and its elucidation, which explains the obligation of the public prosecutor (positive right for the suspect) to provide case transfer letter and indictment including dossier to the suspect or their legal counsel and the investigator when submitting the case transfer letter to the District Court, and Article 72 and its elucidation, which states the negative right of the suspect or legal counsel to request investigation report copy including dossier for the purpose of their defense.

Constitutional Damage

Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul examined the unusual format of the Petitioners\' petition. The introduction, legal standing, authorities of the Court, and so on seemed like that of an undergraduate thesis.

"In addition, the Petitioners must describe the constitutional damage they suffered, both factual and potential. However, in the petition only potential damage is explained," he said.

Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams suggested that the Petitioners learn about the Constitutional Court Law and the Constitutional Court Regulations as well as past petitions by Petitioners who litigated in the Court.

Panel chairperson Justice Aswanto requested that the introduction be deleted and the word "petita" be changed to "petitum." In addition, he advised the Petitioners to clarify and elaborate on the posita. (Nano Tresna Arfana/tir/NRA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti

Translation uploaded on 2/14/2020

---