Petitioner of Criminal Code Strengthens Argument of Constitutional Impairment
Image

Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo chairing the panel petition revision hearing of the material judicial review of the Criminal Code (KUHP), Monday (9/26/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.


Monday, September 26, 2022 | 15:42 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The Constitutional Court (MK) held another judicial review hearing of Law No. 1 of 1946 on the Criminal Code (KUHP) petitioned by entrepreneur Robiyanto. The hearing for case No. 86/PUU-XX/2022 took place on Monday, September 26, 2022. The Petitioner alleged that Article 78 paragraph (1) point 4 of the KUHP was unconstitutional.

At this second hearing, legal counsel Jhon Asron Purba explained the revisions to the petition: the posita and petitum had been separated and strengthened in several parts, the elaboration of the Petitioner’s constitutional impairment, an added elaboration of what would happen if the petition is granted.

“If the petition is granted, Article 78 paragraph (1) point 4 of the KUHP will be conditionally unconstitutional if not interpreted as ‘in more than eighteen years and/or 36 years for all crimes upon which capital punishment or life imprisonment is imposed,’” said Purba before Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo (panel chair), Wahiduddin Adams, and Enny Nurbaningsih.

Also read: Unable to Find Justice for Parent’s Death, Man Challenges Criminal Code

The Petitioner’s father, Taslim, died on April 14, 2002 after being brutally murdered at the Balai Malam Market, Karimun Village, Tebing Subdistrict, Karimun Regency, Riau Islands Province. He reported it to the Karimun Resort Police. Two people were sentenced to prison for 15 years for the crime, while five others were on the wanted list (DPO). However, the investigation of the two court-ruled suspects was terminated by the National Police on the expiry of the statute of limitation following Article 78 paragraph (1) point (4) of the Criminal Code.

The unfair statute of limitation could lead the perpetrators to be acquitted despite their serious, heinous, and barbaric crime that would warrant death sentence or life imprisonment. Purba added that the a quo article could also potentially harm the Petitioner’s constitutional right to recognition, guarantee, protection, fair legal certainty, and equal treatment before the law because of the statute of limitation for the perpetrators of crimes that warrant death penalty or life imprisonment only expires in 18 years. In addition, the Petitioner could potentially obtain no legal certainty of his father’s death relating to the five suspects that are still at large.

Based on these reasons, the Petitioner requested in his petitum that the Court grant the petition in its entirety and declare Article 78 paragraph (1) point 4 unconstitutional and conditionally not legally binding as long as it is not interpreted “in more than eighteen years and/or 36 years for all crimes upon which capital punishment or life imprisonment is imposed.”

Writer        : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Andhini S. F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 10/12/2022 14:52 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.


Monday, September 26, 2022 | 15:42 WIB 37