The Court once again holding the preliminary hearing for the Judicial Review of the Criminal Procedure Code, Tuesday, (5/20/2025), with the agenda of examining the revision of the petition, the panel of Constitutional Justices was seen entering the courtroom. Photo by MKRI/Ilham WM.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) – The Constitutional Court (MK) once again held a petition revision hearing on the judicial review of Law No. 8 of 1981 on  Criminal Procedure Law (KUHAP), on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. The hearing for Case No. 50/PUU-XXIII/2025 was chaired by Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat, accompanied by Constitutional Justices Anwar Usman and Ridwan Mansyur.

Desnadya Anjani Putri, the Petitioner's legal counsel, explained that her client had run a business selling spare parts for electronic equipment such as air conditioners (AC), refrigerators, and washing machines. However, after being sentenced for alleged violation of Article 372 of the Criminal Code with a sentence of 1 year and 8 months, the Petitioner no longer ran her business.

"In her Identity Card (KTP), the Petitioner's job is still listed as a private employee because in 2018 she did work as an employee. However, since being released from prison, the Petitioner has the status of a housewife and has experienced trauma to return to work," said Desnadya before the panel of justices.

Meanwhile, in the reasons for the petition, she explained that the Petitioner as a citizen has the same guarantees, protection and legal certainty and the Petitioner does not want the Petitioner's constitutional rights to be violated by the provisions of Article 160 paragraph (1) letter b of Law No. 8 of 1981.

Previously, in her petition, the Petitioner in this case was Kurniani, a housewife, who challenged the provisions of Article 160 paragraph (1) letter b of the Criminal Procedure Code. The article reads, "The first to be heard is the victim who is a witness." According to the Petitioner, this provision is open to multiple interpretations and has the potential to harm the defendant's constitutional rights in the criminal justice process.

The Petitioner believes that Article 160 paragraph (1) letter b of the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide legal certainty if it is not interpreted explicitly that the victim must be asked for information both during the investigation and trial stages. She gave an example of the case she experienced at the Tangerang District Court, where she was never questioned, either as a victim or a defendant. In fact, the person who was presented as a witness was an employee who was given authority by the company's directors to report the case to the police.

The Petitioner assessed that there were irregularities in the legal process, whereas legally, the person authorized to represent the company is the board of directors. As a comparison, the Petitioner also cited the defamation case that befell the Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs and Investment at that time, Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan. Despite serving as a high-ranking state official, Luhut was still present at the trial as a victim witness. This, according to the Petitioner, is a reflection of the principle of justice in the criminal justice process.

Furthermore, the Petitioner considers that the provisions of Article 160 paragraph (1) letter b of the Criminal Procedure Code have the potential to create unequal legal treatment for the accused. This is contrary to the principle of the rule of law as stated in Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the principle of fair legal certainty as regulated in Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. For this reason, in her petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court annul the validity of the article. (*)

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
Translator  : Donny Yuniarto

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.

---