Prospective Suspect Examination as a Constitutional  Requirement for Suspect Designation Post-KUHAP 2025: Pemeriksaan Calon Tersangka sebagai Syarat Konstitusional Penetapan Tersangka Pasca KUHAP 2025

Reza Hanifa; Fitri Wahyuni

Authors

Reza Hanifa State Islamic University (UIN) Syech Djamil Djambek Bukittinggi, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0009-7973-2485
Fitri Wahyuni Indragiri Islamic University, Riau, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8857-4110

Keywords:

Constitutional Review, Due Process of Law, Prospective Suspect, Suspect Designation

Abstract

Constitutional Court Decision No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 construed the phrase “sufficient preliminary evidence” as requiring at least two items of evidence accompanied by an examination of the prospective suspect. Law No. 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code, effective 2 January 2026, retains the two-evidence standard in Article 90(1) but omits the examination requirement. This study analyses the constitutional position of that requirement and the extent of its accommodation in the new Code. Employing normative legal research with statutory, case, and conceptual approaches, the study finds that the Code adopts the evidentiary component of the constitutional standard while abandoning its procedural component, and that pretrial courts have already treated the examination as non constitutive. The omission weakens the right to be heard and narrows pretrial review to a formal evidentiary count. The study recommends conditional constitutional review of Article 90 and revision of Supreme Court Regulation No. 4 of 2016.

References

Adawiyah, Robiatul, and Umi Rozah. “Indonesia’s Criminal Justice System with Pancasila Perspective as an Open Justice System.” Law Reform Volume 16, Nomor 2 (2020): 191–209. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v16i2.33783.

Alfitra. “Disparitas Putusan Praperadilan dalam Penetapan Tersangka Korupsi oleh KPK.” Jurnal Cita Hukum Volume 4, Nomor 1 (2016): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.15408/jch.v4i1.3201.

Bahran. “Penetapan Tersangka Menurut Hukum Acara Pidana dalam Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia.” Syariah: Jurnal Hukum dan Pemikiran Volume 17, Nomor 2 (2017): 220–239. https://doi.org/10.18592/sy.v17i2.1972.

Effendi, Erdianto. “Relevansi Pemeriksaan Calon Tersangka sebelum Penetapan Tersangka.” Undang: Jurnal Hukum Volume 3, Nomor 2 (2020): 267–288. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.3.2.267-288.

Faisal. “Pre-Trial in Indonesia: Why It Should Be Reformed.” Jurisprudentie Volume 10, Nomor 2 (2023): 70–80. https://doi.org/10.24252/jurisprudentie.v10i2.43678.

Firmansyah, Shandy Herlian, and Achmad Miftah Farid. “Politik Hukum Praperadilan sebagai Lembaga Perlindungan Hak Tersangka Ditinjau dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 mengenai Penetapan Tersangka.” Jurnal Penegakan Hukum dan Keadilan Volume 3, Nomor 2 (2022): 90–103. https://doi.org/10.18196/jphk.v3i2.15195.

Harahap, M. Yahya. Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP: Penyidikan dan Penuntutan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2002.

Heryansyah, Despan, and Harry Setya Nugraha. “Relevansi Putusan Uji Materi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap Sistem Checks and Balances dalam Pembentukan Undang-Undang.” Undang: Jurnal Hukum Volume 2, Nomor 2 (2019): 353–379. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.2.2.353-379.

Iswantoro, Wahyu. “Penemuan Hukum oleh Hakim dan Implikasi terhadap Perkembangan Praperadilan.” Majalah Hukum Nasional Volume 48, Nomor 1 (2018): 45–56. https://doi.org/10.33331/mhn.v48i1.112.

Kripsiaji, Dinar, and Nur Basuki Minarno. “Perluasan Kewenangan dan Penegakan Hukum Praperadilan di Indonesia dan Belanda.” Al-Mazaahib: Jurnal Perbandingan Hukum Volume 10, Nomor 1 (2022): 19–38. https://doi.org/10.14421/al-mazaahib.v10i1.2573.

Kusuma, I Made Wahyu Wiguna, I Made Sepud, and Ni Made Sukaryati Karma. “Upaya Hukum Praperadilan dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia.” Jurnal Interpretasi Hukum Volume 1, Nomor 2 (2020): 73–77. https://doi.org/10.22225/juinhum.1.2.2438.73-77.

Liliyana, Dian, and Yudi Setyadi. “Legal Interpretation of the Constitutional Court on the Deadline Provisions for Imposing Pretrial Decisions Based on Decision Number 66/PUU-XVI/2018.” International Journal of Social Health Volume 1, Nomor 3 (2023): 128–136. https://doi.org/10.58860/ijsh.v1i3.18.

Manuel, Elmir Ferdinan, and M. B. Elmir. “Perluasan Praperadilan sebagai Bentuk Due Process of Law: Perlindungan Hak Asasi Manusia dan Keadilan Sosial.” PUSKAPSI Law Review Volume 2, Nomor 1 (2022): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.19184/puskapsi.v2i1.31189.

Marbun, Rocky. “Trikotomi Relasi dalam Penetapan Tersangka: Menguji Frasa ‘Pemeriksaan Calon Tersangka’ Melalui Praperadilan.” Undang: Jurnal Hukum Volume 4, Nomor 1 (2021): 159–190. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.4.1.159-190.

Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media, 2008.

Muntaha. “Pengaturan Praperadilan dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia.” Mimbar Hukum Volume 29, Nomor 3 (2017): 463–473. https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.22318.

Nurbaedah. “Juridical Study of Reforming the Criminal Procedural Law System regarding Pretrial Institutions after Constitutional Court Decision in Indonesia.” Jurnal Akta Volume 9, Nomor 2 (2022): 141–152. https://doi.org/10.30659/akta.v9i2.21530.

Packer, Herbert L. The Limits of the Criminal Sanction. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1968.

Pangaribuan, Aristo M. A. “Menyegarkan Pendekatan Studi Hukum Acara Pidana.” Mimbar Hukum Volume 33, Nomor 2 (2021): 337–360. https://doi.org/10.22146/mh.v33i2.3727.

Pawana, Sella Christy, and Vincentius Patria Setyawan. “Principles Audi Et Alteram Partem Compatibility in Litigation Process at State and Religious Court: Impact of Pandemic.” Musamus Law Review Volume 4, Nomor 2 (2022): 55–68. https://doi.org/10.35724/mularev.v4i2.4108.

Prasnada, Firman Edi, Sunardi, and Muhibbin. “Status of Pretrial Institutions in Indonesian Criminal Law.” International Journal of Law, Environment, and Natural Resources Volume 3, Nomor 1 (2023): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.51749/injurlens.v3i1.54.

Pura, Mohammad Hatta, and Hesti Faridah. “Asas Akusator dalam Perlindungan Hukum atas Hak Tersangka Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana.” Jurnal Hukum Sasana Volume 7, Nomor 1 (2021): 79–95. https://doi.org/10.31599/sasana.v7i1.536.

Putra Jaya, Nyoman Serikat, Sukinta, and Rahmad Riyan Choiruddin. “Tinjauan Yuridis Penetapan Status Tersangka sebagai Perluasan Objek Praperadilan Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014.” Diponegoro Law Journal Volume 5, Nomor 2 (2016): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.14710/dlj.2016.10860.

Skorupka, Jerzy. “The Rule of Admissibility of Evidence in the Criminal Process of Continental Europe.” Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal Volume 7, Nomor 1 (2021): 93–122. https://doi.org/10.22197/RBDPP.V7I1.526.

Smith, Tom. “The Practice of Pre-trial Detention in England & Wales: Changing Law and Changing Culture.” European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research Volume 28 (2022): 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-022-09504-y.

Suarda, I Gede Widhiana, and Moch Taufiqurrohman. “Limiting the Legality of Determining Suspects in Indonesia Pre-Trial System.” Indonesia Law Review Volume 11, Nomor 2 (2021): 137–156. https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v11n2.2.

Sumadi, Rahmat. “Praperadilan sebagai Sarana Kontrol dalam Melindungi Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) Tersangka.” Jurnal Hukum Sasana Volume 7, Nomor 1 (2021): 149–162. https://doi.org/10.31599/sasana.v7i1.597.

Susilo, Erwin, Ahmad Febriansyah, Dharma Setiawan, and Muhammad Rafi. “Reverse Evidence: A Beacon of Hope for Pretrial Reform.” Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 9, Nomor 2 (2025): 310–327. https://doi.org/10.28946/slrev.v9i2.4642.

Susilo, Erwin, Mohd. Din, Suhaimi, and Teuku Muttaqin Mansur. “Justice Delayed, Justice Denied: A Critical Examination of Repeated Suspect Status in Indonesia.” Hasanuddin Law Review Volume 10, Nomor 3 (2024): 342–357. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v10i3.6088.

Susilo, Erwin, Mohd. Din, Suhaimi, and Teuku Muttaqin Mansur. “The Right to be Heard Prior to Judicial Proceedings: Human Rights and Fair Trial Deficiencies in Indonesian Pre-Trial Processes.” Yustisia Volume 15, Nomor 1 (2026): 47–68. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v15i1.102131.

Teslatu, Lidia Christina Maria. “Penetapan Tersangka sebagai Objek Praperadilan dalam Putusan MK No. 21/PUU-XII/2014 sebagai Pemenuhan HAM dan Tercapainya Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terpadu.” Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: ALETHEA Volume 2, Nomor 2 (2019): 131–144. https://doi.org/10.24246/alethea.vol2.no2.p131-144.

Wiguna, Anak Agung Putu Surya, I Made Sepud, and I Nyoman Sujana. “Hak-Hak Tersangka (Miranda Rule) pada Tahap Penyidikan dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana.” Jurnal Konstruksi Hukum Volume 1, Nomor 1 (2020): 51–56. https://doi.org/10.22225/jkh.1.1.2128.51-56.

Yasir, M., Gunarto, and Bambang Tri Bawono. “Legal Reconstruction of Suspect Investigation Based on Pancasila Justice Values.” Scholars International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice Volume 7, Nomor 1 (2024): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.36348/sijlcj.2024.v07i01.002.

Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Decision No. 21/PUU-XII/2014, 28 April 2015.

Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Decision No. 130/PUU-XIII/2015, 11 January 2017.

Law No. 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code.

Law No. 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code.

Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Regulation No. 4 of 2016 concerning the Prohibition of Judicial Review of Pretrial Decisions.

The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.