Legal Certainty Value in Pre-Accusation Institute to Optimize Justice for Justice Seekers: Reconstruction of Pre-Accusation in the Criminal Procedure Code

• Author: Lia Pratiwi
• Position: University Padjadjaran, Faculty of Law, Bandung, INDONESIA
• Pages: 23-34

Center for Open Access in Science  https://www.centerprode.com/ojls.html

Open Journal for Legal Studies, 2020, 3(1), 23-34.

ISSN (Online) 2620-0619  https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojls.0301.02023p

__________________________________________________ _______________________

© Authors. Terms and conditions of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) apply.

Correspondence: Lia Pratiwi, University Padjadjaran, Faculty of Law, Bandung, INDONESIA. E-mail:

liapratiwi2020@gmail.com.

Legal Certainty Value in Pre-Accusation Institute to

Optimize Justice for Justice Seekers: Reconstruction

of Pre-Accusation in the Criminal Procedure Code

Lia Pratiwi1

University Padjadjaran, Faculty of Law, Bandung, INDONESIA

Received: 4 February 2020  Accepted: 3 April 2020  Published Onlin e: 12 April 2020

Abstract

The pre-accusation institute is currently facing an extraordinary problem. The imbalance with

the lack of communication betwe en the investigation and the prosecutor is very obvious. Beside

the legal vacuum must be how long and how many pre -prosecutions do. Between norms and the

relationship and communication between law enforcement officers in the prosecution institution,

it can cause the value of justice and legal certainty to be harmed, so that justice s eekers receive

treatment that does not res pect the values of human rights. Concrete ste p as an effort to restore

the function of this pre-prosecution institution is to carry out reconstruction o f this institution.

The consequence is fixing positive rules as in the Criminal Procedure Code, which can be

implemented in the establishment of the Criminal Procedure Code Bill.

Keywords: pre-accusation, reconstruction, certainty and justice, human rights.

1. Introduction

Provisions before the entry into force of the Criminal Procedure Code, namely HIR

(Het Herziene Inland Reglement) that the authority to investigate all criminal acts is a prosecutor

(magistraat), while the police act as “assistant prosecutors” (hulp magistraat).

2 In fact, it is clear

in the HIR that the police are assistant prosecutors in the investigation process. This means that

the investigative institution is fully under the authority and power of the prosecutor’s office, so

that in the body of the prosecutor’s office there is a so-called Central Investigation Service that is

headed by a police officer.3 However, in the current system, prosecutors only function as case file

researchers and it is difficult to assess whether a case is included in the prosecution or not because

the entire set of investigations is only carried out by the Police.

His friendship with the position of the Attorney General’s Office (Procureur Generaal

bij de Hoge Raad), which is under one roof together with the Supreme Court (MA). This position

is reminiscent of the legal position (recht positie) of the Attorney General and the Attorney

1 Doctorate Candidate in Law Science.

2 Andi Hamzah, Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia, Sinar Grafika: Jakarta, 2010, 132.

3 Sutherweim, Dwi Windu Sejarah Kejaksaan, Kejaksaan RI: Jakarta, 1991.