Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo, Saldi Isra, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh presiding over the judicial review hearing of Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), Monday (10/23/2023). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another material judicial review hearing of Article 77 paragraph (1) of Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) on Monday, October 23, 2023 in one of the panel courtrooms. The petition No. 123/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by M. Samosir Pakpahan, an advocate. The on-site hearing was presided over by Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo, Arief Hidayat, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.

Legal counsel Elvis Kristian Suparna said that the revised petition includes the district court’s authority to examine pretrial motions. “We have revised the petition of Article 77 letter a of Law No. 8 of 1981 on KUHAP (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 1981 No. 76 on the authority of the district court to examine and decide),” he said.

He added that the Petitioner also revised the Court’s authority and the Petitioner’s constitutional loss. At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner said that a person’s arrest can be challenged by a pretrial motion, which allows a suspect to challenge investigators and public prosecutors on the validity of the arrest and to question whether it violates human rights. However, the KUHAP does not regulate the period between the determination of the arrest and the pretrial motion filing, thus causing legal uncertainty.

Also read: Provision on Pretrial Motion Filing Period Challenged

The Petitioner said that on Law No.8 of 1981 on the KUHAP and the Constitutional Court Decision No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 do not regulate the period between the issuance of warrant, arrest warrant, detention warrant, investigation termination, and prosecution determination, suspect determination, search warrant, seizure warrant, and request for compensation or rehabilitation until the pretrial.

Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioner requests that the Court add the phrase “14 days after the issuance of arrest warrant, detention warrant, investigation termination and prosecution determination, suspect determination, search warrant, seizure warrant, and request for compensation or rehabilitation until the pretrial” to the a quo article.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : M. Halim
Translator  : Nyi Mas Laras Nur Inten Kemalasari/Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

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.

---