Preliminary hearing for the material judicial review of the Criminal Code (KUHP) petitioned by advocate Abdul Hakim, Wednesday (1/17/2024). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court held a preliminary hearing for the material judicial review of Article 340 of the Criminal Code (KUHP) on Wednesday, January 17, 2024. The case No. 1/PUU-XXII/2024 was filed by an advocate, Abdul Hakim.

He challenges the word “motive” in Article 340 of the Criminal Code, which reads, “Any person who with deliberate intent and with premeditation takes the life of another person, shall, being guilty of murder, be punished by capital punishment of life imprisonment or a maximum imprisonment of twenty years.”

Before a panel chaired by Chief Justice Suhartoyo, legal counsel Nathan Christy Noah explained that as an advocate, the Petitioner often provides legal assistance in manslaughter or murder. “In the legal assistance process, the Petitioner feels there is no clear, complete, and comprehensive interpretation of the determination of ‘motive’ in murder as included in Article 340 of the KUHP,” he said.

The Petitioner stresses that motive is an important aspect in court ruling. This means that it can affect the severity of the sentence. He also argues that it would be unfair that a manslaughter done in self-defense is given the same sentence as a murder done for revenge on the ground that they are the same offense, despite the difference motives.

In addition, in a murder, the absence of burden of proof of motive could lead to the defendants having different motives to receive the same sentence. This, the Petitioner argues, violates defendants’ right to self-defense and fair treatment, thus restricting the Petitioner’s defense of his clients.

The Petitioner also stresses the reasons for the importance of motive, which can support judges in understanding and connecting facts and the perpetrators, the rationality of an incident, and the red thread of the psychological element to describe the severity of the crimes.

With these arguments, the Petitioner requests that the Court declare Article 340 of the Criminal Code unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “Any person who with deliberate intent and with premeditation takes the life of another person, shall, being guilty of murder, be punished by capital punishment of life imprisonment or a maximum imprisonment of twenty years.”

Justices’ Advice

In response, Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh advised the Petitioner to add academic journal papers as references to convince the justices. “There are legal journals. Please add to the petition’s reason,” he said.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah said the petition has met Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2021. However, he gave his notes on minor typos in the elaboration of the Court’s authority.

At the end of the hearing, the justice panel gave the Petitioner 14 days to revise the petition. The revised petition must be received by the Registrar’s Office by Wednesday, January 31, 2024.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Fitri Yuliana
Translator  : 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.

---