Legal Politics of Investigation Authority in Criminal Offences Under the Draft Criminal Procedure Code (RKUHAP)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33506/js.v11i3.4273Keywords:
Investigation, Law, Politics, RKUHAPAbstract
The aim of investigative research is a pro justisia stage that serves to gather two pieces of evidence to find the perpetrator of a criminal act after an investigation. This process is known as due process of law, which is contained in the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). The renewal of criminal procedure law is to balance the pre-enactment of the 2026 Criminal Law. Therefore, several research objectives were obtained, namely to explain the authority of investigation in criminal acts in the 1981 KUHAP. Then, another objective is to explain the legal policy review related to the authority of investigation in criminal acts based on the Draft National Criminal Procedure Code.
The method used in this study is normative juridical research combined with empirical data, through a conceptual approach, a legislative approach, and a case approach.
Novelty This study is novel in that criminal procedure law, particularly dominus litis authority, cannot be expanded and the portion of investigation must remain with the state police investigators. This refers to the effectiveness and efficiency of law enforcement and the principles of human rights.
The results of this study show that the authority to investigate criminal acts in Law No. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure is vested in the Indonesian National Police. The legal policy review regarding investigative authority in criminal cases based on the Draft National Criminal Procedure Code aims to prioritize the prosecutorial authority of the public prosecutor in the handling of criminal cases. However, this situation may lead to undesirable issues in the future, such as violations of human rights and the inefficiency of the criminal justice process.
The conclusion of this study is that the expansion of the authority of public prosecutors as criminal investigators is dangerous. Therefore, in terms of efficiency, effectiveness, and the enforcement of human rights, the expansion of the authority of public prosecutors in investigations under the Draft Criminal Procedure Code has the potential to undermine the sense of legal justice.
References
Adi Riyanto, Tiar. “Fungsionalisasi Prinsip Dominus Litis Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Lex Renaissance 6, no. 3 (2021): 481–92. https://doi.org/10.20885/jlr.vol6.iss3.art4.
Adlina, Nisa Amalina. “Kewenangan Penyidikan Terhadap Tindak Pidana Di Sektor Jasa Keuangan” 15, no. 4 (2023): 250–69.
Ardyansyah, and Dahlan. “The Application of the Principles of Dominus Litis by the Prosecutor in the Narcotics Criminal Act.” IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) 25, no. 3 (2020): 31–35. https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2503053135.
Arief, Barda Nawawi. Perbandingan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: CV. Rajawali, 1990.
B.S Putra, A.Andrian. “Pakar Hukum Pidana FH UISU Dukung RUU KUHAP Dievaluasi.” Viva.Co.Id, 2025. https://medan.viva.co.id/medan/8560-pakar-hukum-pidana-fh-uisu-dukung-ruu-kuhap-dievaluasi.
Bawole, Herlyanty. “Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Korban Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana.” Lex Et Societatis 3, no. 3 (2021): 16–24. https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/index.php/lexetsocietatis/article/view/36433/33905.
Deassy J.A. Hehanussa, Margie Gladies et.al. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Edited by Elan Jaelani. Jurnal Widina Bhakti Persada. Vol. 4. Bandung: Widina Bhakti Persada Bandung, 2023. https://medium.com/@arifwicaksanaa/pengertian-use-case-a7e576e1b6bf%0Ahttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2021.100642.
Depari, Jimmi, Maidin Gultom, and Syawal Amry Siregar. “Peran Kepolisian Dalam Penanganan Tindakpidana Pemalsuan Surat Pasal 263 Kuhp (Studi Di Kepolisian Daerah Sumatera Utara).” Jurnal Retentum 3, no. 1 (2021): 99–107. https://doi.org/10.46930/retentum.v3i1.907.
Fajar, Mochamad. “Restorative Justice Sebagai Hukum Progresif Oleh Penyidik Polri.” Jurnal Ilmu Kepolisian 13, no. 3 (2019): 225–38. https://sespim.lemdiklat.polri.go.id/assets/file/1709023724_RESTORATIVE_JUSTICE_KONSEPSI_DAN_URGENSI_DAN_PENERAPANNYA_DI_Indonesia_OLEH_Dr._JEAN_CALVIJN_SIMANJUNTAK.pdf.
Hamid, Supardi, I Gusti Kade, Budhi Harryarsana, and Adhi Iman Sulaiman. “Reconstruction Of Authority Attorney General In Disclaimer Of Case For The Sake Of The Public Interest In The Criminal Justice System In Indonesia.” Russian Law Journal XI, no. 2 (2023): 394–408. https://doi.org/10.30652/rlj.v3i2.7813.2.
Harahap, M. Yahya. Pembahasan Permasalahan Dan Penerapan KUHAP: Penyidikan Dan Penuntutan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2015.
Hasbullah, M A. “Implementation of Restorative Justice in Handling Cases of Bullying in Schools.” Journal of Positive School Psychology 6, no. 3 (2022): 9970–78.
Hutabarat, Dany Try Hutama, Agung Gumelar, Al Madina, Dina Puspita Sari, Khairul Azhar, Muhammad Sakha Sinaga, Nurul Padila, et al. “Pentingnya Hak Asasi Manusia (Ham) Dalam Bernegara.” Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Dan Pengajaran 1, no. 2 (2022): 80–91. https://doi.org/10.55047/jrpp.v1i2.213.
Ilyas, Adam, Felix Bakker, and Dicky Prasetio. “PLURALISME KEWENANGAN PENYIDIKAN DALAM PEMBERANTASAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI DI INDONESIA.” Kertha Semaya Journal Ilmu Hukum 10 (December 28, 2021): 150–62.
Johansyah, Johansyah, and Abdul Roni. “Asas Praduga Tak Bersalah Dalam Proses Penyidikan.” Solusi 21, no. 1 (2023): 17–35. https://doi.org/10.36546/solusi.v21i1.805.
Jubaidi, Didi. “Pengaruh Politik Terhadap Hukum: Interaksi Antara Keputusan Politik Dan Keadilan Hukum.” Al Daulah Jurnal Hukum Pidana Dan Ketatanegaraan 9, no. 2 (March 25, 2024): 159–75. https://doi.org/10.24252/ad.v9i2.16085.
Laloan, Natalia Orient. “Kewenangan Penyidik Dan Penuntut Umum Menurut Sistem Peradilan Pidana Dalam Menangani Perkara Pidana Menurut KUHAP.” Lex Crimenrimen IX, no. 2 (2020): 1–23. https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/v3/index.php/lexcrimen/article/view/28550/27899.
Listiyanto, Apri. “Pembaharuan Sistem Hukum Acara Pidana.” Rechtsvinding, 2017, 1–4. https://rechtsvinding.bphn.go.id/view/view_online.php?id=234.
Lutfil Ansori. “Reformasi Penegakan Hukum Perspektif Progresif.” Jurnal Yuridis 4, no. 2 (2017): 148. https://doi.org/10.35586/.v4i2.244.
Marpaung, Leden. Proses Penanganan Perkara Pidana (Penyelidikan Dan Penyidikan). Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2009.
Pushampol UISU. “Focus Group Discussion Tentang Politik Hukum Kewenangan Penyidikan Tindak Pidana Dalam RKUHAP.” Medan, 2025.
Rahardjo, Satjipto. Ilmu Hukum, Cet. III. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 1991.
Siagian, Fahrizal S., Susilawati, and Syarifuddin. “Penyidikan Terhadap Tindak Pidana Jual Beli Vaksin Secara Ilegal Dalam Penanggulangan Pandemi Covid-19(Studi Pada Kepolisian Daerah Sumatera Utara).” Jurnal Hukum Dan Kemasyarakatan Al-Hikmah 3, no. 2 (2022): 358–67.
Siagian, Fahrizal S, Mahmud Mulyadi, and Rosmalinda. “Criminal Law Policy Concerning Providing Restitution To Victims Of Crimes Of Serious.” Semarang Law Review 5, no. 2 (2024): 13–36. file:///C:/Users/Administrator/Downloads/39613-98293-1-PB.pdf.
Soehartono, Kukuh Tejomurti, Arsyad Aldyan, and Rachma Indriyani. “The Establishing Paradigm of Dominus Litis Principle in Indonesian Administrative Justice.” Sriwijaya Law Review 5, no. 1 (2021): 42–55. https://doi.org/10.28946/slrev.Vol5.Iss1.603.pp42-55.
Soesilo, R, and M. Karyadi. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) Dengan Penjelasan Resmi Dan Komentar. BOGOR: Politeia, 2015.
Sudiadi, Muhammad Hikmat. “Implementasi Asas Dominus Litis Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Modern Di Indonesia.” Mahalisan Volume 1, no. Nomor 1 (2024): 1–15.
Sulchan, Achmad. Hukum Acara Pidana Dan Sistem Peradilan Pidana Dalam Praktek Beracara, n.d.
Tresna, Lalu Panca, Amiruddin Amiruddin, and Ufran Ufran. “Implementation of the Principle of Dominus Litis in Positive Law in Indonesia.” International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis 05, no. 11 (2022): 3123–31. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v5-i11-20.
Wiguna, Made Oka Cahyadi. “Pemikiran Hukum Progresif Untuk Perlindungan Hukum Dan Kesejahteraan Masyarakat Hukum Adat.” Jurnal Konstitusi, 2021. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1816.
Zuhal, Muhammad, Qolbu Lathof, and Surastini Fitriasih. “Proyeksi Konsep Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Di Indonesia : Telaah Perbandingan Hukum Dengan Amerika Serikat.” Nagari Law Review 7, no. 3 (2024): 466–85. http://nalrev.fhuk.unand.ac.id/.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Panca Sarjana Putra, Fahrizal S.Siagian, Brimob Ritonga, Saied Firouzfar, Dedi Kurniawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
