Advocate Retracts Petition on Motive in Criminal Code
Image

Legal counsel Actaviani Carolina confirming the withdrawal of petition No. 1/PUU-XXII/2024 virtually, Friday (2/2/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.


JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another material judicial review hearing of the Criminal Code (KUHP) on Friday, February 2, 2024 in the plenary courtroom. The hearing served to confirm the retraction of petition No. 1/PUU-XXII/2024 filed by Abdul Hakim, an advocate.

Panel chair Chief Justice Suhartoyo revealed that the Court had received the retraction request by one of the Petitioner’s ten legal counsels.

“Out of the legal counsels, why only one filed for [the retraction request]? Are the other counsels and the Petitioner in agreement?” he asked.

In response, legal counsel Actaviani Carolina stated that the other counsels and the Petitioner are in agreement on the retraction of the petition.

Also read:

Advocate Requests Motive Be Considered for Criminal Sentence

Advocate Revises Petition on Motive in Criminal Code

Abdul Hakim, an advocate, challenges the word “motive” in Article 340 of the Criminal Code (KUHP), 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.”

At the preliminary hearing for case No. 1/PUU-XXII/2024 on Wednesday, January 17, 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 stressed that motive was an important aspect in court ruling. This means that it can affect the severity of the sentence. He also argued 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 the petitum, the Petitioner requested 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.”  

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
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.


Friday, February 02, 2024 | 16:01 WIB 38