what should be achieved in pretrial efforts
In the process of criminal law enforcement in fact often occurs people are arrested and detained without a warrant of arrest and / or detention, even the process of arrest is often carried out without regard to human rights, or violate article 18 paragraph (1) of Law No.39 of 1999 on human rights, related to the principle of presumption of innocence, which reads: "Every person arrested, detained, and prosecuted for suspected of committing a crime has the right to be presumed innocent, until proven guilty legally in a court hearing and given all legal guarantees necessary for his defense, in accordance with the provisions of the law" and based on article 4 of the same Law, everyone has the "right not to be tortured" in law enforcement. And in article 9 paragraph (2) of Law No.4 of 2004 concerning The Judicial Power of Officials who violate the above provisions can no longer be convicted but "convicted".
As we know Pretrial is the authority of the
District Court to examine and decide on: a) The validity of an arrest and or
detention at the request of the suspect or his family or an interest request
for the establishment of law and justice; b) The validity of the termination of
the investigation or the termination of the prosecution at the request of the
concerned for the sake of the establishment of law and justice; and c) Requests
for compensation or rehabilitation by the suspect or his family or other
parties or their proxy whose cases are not brought to the Court; The matter of
pretrial is imitatively regulated in article 77 to article 83 of Law No.8 of
1981 on Kuhn.
So far in practice the right about pretrial
is only done by the suspect or the suspect's family through his legal power by
conducting a Pretrial Lawsuit against the Police or against the Prosecutor to
the local District Court whose substance of the lawsuit is questioning the
validness of the arrest or detention or about the validness of the termination
of the investigation or prosecution. We have never heard that the Police
pre-trial prosecutors about the validity of the Termination of Prosecution of
suspects / defendants, or on the contrary the Prosecutor's office prejudices
the Police about the validity of the Termination of Investigation.
It is necessary to know by the public in
general and law enforcement in particular that article 77 s / d article 83 of
the Criminal Code governing pretrial not only gives the right to the suspect or
his family to pre-trial the Police and prosecutors, but the article also gives
the right to the Police to pre-justice prosecutors as well as the contrary the
article also gives the right to the Prosecutor's Office to pre-trial the
Police. If a criminal case is already in the SPDP (P.16) from the Police to the
Prosecutor's Office and in its development according to the assessment of the
Prosecutor's office the case has qualified for prosecution, but in the middle
of the road suddenly the Police issued SP3 (Letter of Determination of
Termination of Investigation) on the case then for the sake of the
establishment of law and justice should be the final effort taken by the
Prosecutor is to conduct a Pretrial Lawsuit against the Police to the District
Court. Similarly, if a case has been declared sufficient evidence by the
Prosecutor (P.21) and / or has been delegated from the Police to the
Prosecutor, but in the middle of the road suddenly the Prosecutor issued SP3
(Letter of Determination of Termination of Prosecution), then it should be for
the sake of the establishment of law and justice the Police should dare to
conduct a Pretrial Lawsuit against the Prosecutor to the District Court.
Comments
Post a Comment