Chief Justice Suhartoyo (right) opening a judicial review hearing of Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), Tuesday (11/21/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another hearing for the judicial review of Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) against the 1945 Constitution on Tuesday, November 21, 2023. The petition No. 87/PUUXX/2023 was filed by Gugum Ridho Putra, an advocate.

Originally, the agenda of today’s hearing had been to hear testimony from the House of Representatives (DPR) and the President/Government. However, according to report from the Registrar’s Office, the House was unable to attend and the Government, especially the Prosecution Office, was not ready to provide testimony.

In response, Chief Justice Suhartoyo informed that the hearing was postponed until Wednesday, December 6, 2023 at 13:30 WIB. The hearing agenda remains the same, to hear the testimony of the House and the President/Government.

Also read:

Petitioner Wishes KPK’s Authority in Connexity Corruption Offenses Be Strengthened 

Petitioner of KPK Law Revises Legal Standing

The petition No. 87/PUUXX/2023 was filed by Gugum Ridho Putra, an advocate. The Petitioner challenges Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK Law), as last amended by Law No. 19 of 2019 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 30 of 2002, and Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). Specifically, he challenges the phrase “coordinate and control” in Article 42 of the KPK Law as well as the word “Investigator” in Article 89 paragraph (2); the phrase “Minister of Justice” in Article 89 paragraph (1), Article 89 paragraph (3), Article 91 paragraph (2), and Article 94 paragraph (5); the phrase “prosecutor or high prosecutor” in Article 90 paragraph (1), Article 90 paragraph (3), Article 91 paragraph (1), and Article 91 paragraph (3); the phrase “high prosecutor” in Article 93 paragraph (1); the phrase “Attorney General” in Article 90 paragraph (3), Article 93 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3); the phrase “Public Prosecutor” in Article 91 paragraph (1), Article 92 paragraph (1), and Article 93 paragraph (1) of the KUHAP.

At the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, August 30, the Petitioner cited impairment related to the authority to investigate criminal offenses in connexity or criminal offenses involving both civilians and military officers, especially corruption crimes handled by the KPK. He believes the handling of corruption cases in connexity by the KPK is inclined to prioritize punishment on criminals who are civilians. He believes the KPK’s unprofessionalism in handling connexity cases is due to unclear norms regulating the investigation and prosecution of connexity offenses.

Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioner requests that the Court grant his petition and declare Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission and Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) unconstitutional and not legally binding and, among other things, declare the phrase “coordinate and control” in Article 42 of the KPK Law means that the KPK is obliged to coordinate and control the handling of connexity corruption cases in accordance with Articles 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, and 94 of the KUHAP. 

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Andhini S.F.
Translator  : Tahlitha Laela/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.

---