The Effectiveness of Fair Pre-Prosecution: Solutions to Current Law Enforcement Problems

The use of forensic DNA evidence in the criminal justice system in Indonesia faces various challenges, especially related to regulations that are not fully aligned with international standards. Law No. 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), especially Articles 184 and 186, does not provide specific guidelines regarding the procedures for collecting, testing, and using forensic DNA evidence in the criminal evidence process. This study aims to analyze the regulations and procedures governing forensic DNA evidence in Indonesia and propose legal solutions to strengthen the regulations to comply with international standards. This study uses a normative legal research method, focusing on the analysis of relevant laws, legal doctrines, and court decisions. Discussions center on the harmonization of national regulations with international standards, strengthening the capacity of forensic institutions, and reforming legal procedures related to DNA evidence. The research findings indicate that Indonesia needs more comprehensive regulatory reforms related to the use of forensic DNA evidence, especially regarding the accreditation of forensic laboratories according to international standards such as ISO 17025 and the development of transparent and legally accountable evidence collection procedures. In conclusion, although DNA evidence has great potential to strengthen convictions in the criminal justice system, regulatory reform and strengthening of forensic institutions are needed for the Indonesian justice system to adopt higher international standards. Thus, the use of forensic DNA evidence can contribute significantly to justice in criminal law enforcement in Indonesia.

The criminal justice system is a criminal law enforcement system consisting of several judiciary institutions which become the supporting sub-subsystem of the whole system. All this time the government bureaucracy organization plays a role as executor of state power in the field of justice. The system approach to judicial administrative mechanisms here considers the police, prosecutors, courts and correctional institutions and other judicial institutions not only as standalone institutions, but each of them as important elements that is closely related to each other. However, the fact shows that Indonesian criminal justice system is not yet integrated. The problem stated in this research is how to create the management of integrated criminal justice system in Indonesia? This research is considered as qualitative research using socio legal research approach aspect. The way data is obtained starts from the process of data collection, data reduction, data presentation to the conclusion by using analysis and data technique validation using triangulation source. The result of this study indicates that the criminal justice system in Indonesia is still not integrated because there is no good coordination among fellow subsystems supporting the criminal justice system, there is still an institutional centric phenomenon or strong sector ego within each subsystem supporting the criminal justice system, the mal-administration in the implementation of the tasks of each subsystem supporting the criminal justice system. Such matters indicate that the Criminal Justice System in Indonesia has not been well managed, thus it has not been able to fulfill the public sense of justice.

This study aims to provide a description regarding the influence of the District Court judge's verdict in the Sambo cs case on the level of public trust in the criminal justice system in Indonesia. The approach in this study uses a type of quantitative research. The sample of respondents consisted of 200 respondents located in Brebes Regency, Tegal Regency, Tegal City and Pemalang Regency. The sampling technique used non-random sampling with purposive sampling. While the instrument used in this research is a questionnaire. The data analysis technique uses the independence hypothesis test through the Khai-Square distribution. This study concludes that based on the calculation results, the khai-squared value is 62.586. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted. In fact, the District Court judge's verdict in the Sambo cs case did influence the level of public trust in the criminal justice system in Indonesia.

This study examines and analyzes related criminal cases abuse in the criminal justice system in Indonesia under Law No. 16 of 2004 on the Prosecutor of the Republic Indonesia by closing a criminal case under the Code of Criminal Procedure (Criminal Procedure Code). This research method using a normative juridical approach to law (Statute Approach). Primary legal materials, secondary, and tertiary obtained by the author will be analyzed using analytical techniques interpretation of the law, namely: Content Analysis, which is used as a reference in resolving legal issues that become the object of study.
 From the research results to the above method, the authors obtain answers to existing problems that the implementation case abuse accordance with the principles of opportunity in Article 35 letter c of Law Number 16 of 2004 on the Prosecutor of the Republic of Indonesia is still relatively small only be carried out by the Attorney General as the head chief prosecutor Court of the Republic of Indonesia in excluding criminal cases, and the closure of the case can be implemented by all prosecutors as the public prosecutor (prosecutor) without a process of public interest but can only be enforced closure of the case in the interest of law-related problems that menyangkat communities concerned in criminal cases.

This study aims to examine the victimological impact of the wrongful arrest case involving Pegi Setiawan in the murder of Vina and Eky, as well as its influence on investigative practices and the use of evidence in the criminal justice system in Indonesia. The case drew national attention because it revealed structural weaknesses in law enforcement processes, particularly concerning the haste in naming suspects, the lack of evidence verification, and the suboptimal protection of suspects' rights. This study aims to analyze the forms of victimization experienced by the wrongfully arrested victim, evaluate the factors causing procedural errors in investigations, and identify the implications for the legitimacy of the criminal justice system. Using a juridical-normative approach and case study analysis, this study found that Pegi suffered psychological, social, and economic losses, as well as prolonged stigma due to the mistakes of law enforcement officials. Furthermore, this case demonstrates a discrepancy between the ideal standards of investigation and field practice, including officers' weak objectivity, professionalism, and accountability in assessing evidence. This study concludes that the Pegi Setiawan case reflects the need for deep reforms through strengthening oversight mechanisms, enhancing investigator capacity, and reinforcing.

This paper aims to explore the urgency of reconstructing the institutional role of the Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK) within Indonesia’s criminal justice system. Using a normative and empirical legal research methods, which is done by literature review, field exploration, and analysis, it builds an accurate and concrete model for implementing the construction of the position of the LPSK in the current criminal justice system. This study found that bureaucratic challenges—such as financial limitations, inadequate human resources, and institutional stagnation—have constrained the justice system’s ability to function equitably. These conditions often lead to the centralization of investigative power and a compartmentalized system in which oversight is limited and reactive. Within this context, LPSK holds potential as a horizontal oversight mechanism, offering checks on investigators’ authority and ensuring victim and witness rights are safeguarded during proceedings. This paper further analyzes how the Criminal Procedure Code anticipates horizontal supervision between law enforcement agencies, particularly between investigators and public prosecutors, and how LPSK can contribute to this oversight structure. However, limitations in institutional capacity and the centralized nature of LPSK pose challenges to its accessibility and effectiveness. Strengthening LPSK’s institutional capacity and expanding its regional presence are critical for responding to the growing demand for witness and victim protection, including in cases involving gross human rights violations. This study underscores the need for systemic reform and political will to ensure that protection of witnesses and victims becomes an integral part of a due process-oriented criminal justice system in Indonesia.

Enforcement of the criminal justice system in Indonesia can also be carried out by implementing court decisions that have permanent legal force. The party that has the authority to implement the judge's decision is the prosecutor. In the contents of the criminal decision, the prosecutor's office has the authority to immediately carry out the execution in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. This study aims to determine the authority of the prosecutor in carrying out the execution, and to determine the execution mechanism for the crime of murder. This research uses normative methods, statutory approaches, conceptual approaches, primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, tertiary legal materials, document studies, literature studies, internet studies and analysis of legal interpretations, and descriptive analysis. The only executing agency in the State of Indonesia is the Attorney General's Office of the Republic of Indonesia. The meaning of executor is the party who has the authority to carry out court decisions based on the applicable law. The results showed that in carrying out court decisions, the prosecutor's office had duties and functions, one of which was as an executor as well as a general prosecutor. A decision that can be executed is only one that has permanent legal force and there are no more legal remedies. Prosecutors as law enforcement officers in carrying out their duties must be based on the applicable legal rules. Do not let the prosecutor violate rules that are not under their authority. Law enforcement officials who carry out executions must carry out the execution as quickly as possible and no criminal offender is executed late.

The integrality of the criminal justice system must be realized in every aspect of sub-systems, in substance, structure, and legal culture. In this respect, in the process of criminal justice, the three sub-systems’ integrality are required so that the criminal justice system is capable to produce fair legal decisions in the process of law enforcement in Indonesia. Until such a policy is undertaken, the law will always be harsh against the poor and weak against the rich. This paper discusses criminal objectives integrality in Indonesian criminal justice system and its influence in the integrated criminal justice system. Using a normative juridical method, this paper demonstrates that each sub-system of criminal justice (the Police, Prosecutors, Courts, and the prison) is in line with the main objectives of criminal law enforcement as found in various laws that govern the institutions.

This article discusses the phenomenon of criminalisation of online gambling in society and its implications for the criminal justice system in Indonesia. Gambling, which is regulated in the Criminal Code (KUHP) Article 303 and Article 303 bis, has undergone transformation in line with the development of information technology. Online gambling, as a form of gambling that utilises the internet, poses new challenges in law enforcement and community protection. In this context, this study aims to analyse the social impact of online gambling as well as the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in handling gambling cases that occur in cyberspace. Through a normative approach and juridical analysis, this article finds that despite clear regulations on gambling, the implementation of the law still faces obstacles, including the lack of public understanding of the risks and legal consequences of online gambling. Therefore, synergy between law enforcement, government, and the community is needed to create more effective awareness and prevention of online gambling practices.

Law enforcement aims to promote societal order and legal certainty by clearly defining the roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the institutions tasked with upholding the law, in accordance with their respective jurisdictions. This process extends beyond the mere fulfillment of duties; it involves the comprehensive enforcement of legal norms. The law serves as a mechanism for safeguarding human interests, and to protect these interests effectively, it must be applied equitably. Upholding basic human rights is imperative, and no entity, including the state, has the right to infringe upon an individual's fundamental rights. The adoption of the Miranda Rule/Miranda Principles into Indonesian positive law—through the enactment of Law Number 39 of 1999 on Human Rights and Law Number 12 of 2005 on the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights—has strengthened the rights of suspects and defendants, particularly their right to legal assistance and defense. The Miranda Rule/Miranda Principles are vital to the criminal justice system, particularly in protecting the rights of suspects during interrogation. As a legal state, Indonesia upholds these principles, which are integrated into various judicial laws. These principles emphasize the necessity for law enforcement officers to prioritize the rights of suspects and defendants. Providing legal assistance to suspects or defendants is a fundamental aspect of the criminal justice system, and it is expected that all law enforcement officers conduct their duties in a coordinated manner, adhering to the principles of this system. The presence of legal counsel, as mandated by Article 56 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), is essential; neglecting this requirement can result in the nullification of the proceedings' outcomes, including investigations, prosecutions, or trials.

Historically, alternative efforts to resolve criminal cases have existed since the Dutch colonial era, even before Indonesia's independence. Currently, there are several forms of resolving criminal cases outside of court in force, namely diversion (transferring the resolution of children's cases from the criminal justice process to a process outside criminal justice in accordance with the Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law), Afkoop (as regulated in Article 82 of the Criminal Code), and Seponeren (dismissal of cases in the public interest by the Attorney General). The aim of this research is to analyze the concept of restorative justice in the criminal law system as a breakthrough in legal benefits. Approach The research method that can be used in this research is the empirical juridical approach. This approach combines a normative juridical approach with an empirical approach. Based on the analysis carried out, restorative justice can be applied in cases that cause financial loss or minor crimes. The principle of restorative justice in resolving criminal cases in Indonesia does not only depend on formal and material criminal law provisions but is also based on a broader concept of punishment. The model for implementing restorative justice in Indonesian criminal procedural law can be found through a criminal resolution mechanism that follows a legitimate legal problem resolution approach, which is reflected in the reform of the criminal justice system in Indonesia, which is based on an evaluation of the criminal justice system.

In the criminal justice system in Indonesia, correctional institutions<br />are one of the pillars in implementing law enforcement.in essence<br />the prisoners are as human beings and human resources who must<br />be treated well and humanely in an integrated coaching system. In<br />the correctional system there are two missions and goals to be<br />achieved. First, as a punishment (punishmen), namely an effort to<br />implement enforcement, legal certainty and to cause a deterrent<br />effect second, as an improvement (treatment) which is an effort<br />directed to education, coaching, training and prevention which all<br />lead to the goal of improving the preparation and enlightening of<br />the future of prisoners. The treatment of prisoners is based on<br />Pancasila and the 1945 constitution, which is the final part of the<br />criminal system.in this case the penitentiary system is a series of<br />law enforcement that aims to make prisoners aware of their<br />mistakes, improve themselves and not repeat the crime, so that they<br />can be accepted again by the community, can actively play a role<br />in development and can live fairly as good, righteous citizens and<br />responsible.<br /><br />

The reform of Indonesia's national criminal law marks a paradigm shift from a retributive punishment system to a Restorative Justice approach that places greater emphasis on victim recovery, social reconciliation, and perpetrator rehabilitation. This principle has been accommodated in various regulations, such as Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, Prosecutor's Regulation No. 15 of 2020, and Article 54 of the new Criminal Code which allows for the consideration of restorative justice in judges' decisions. In Islamic criminal law, the concept of qisas-diyat and the dispute resolution mechanism based on islah (peace) show alignment with restorative justice. Caliph Umar bin Khattab is an example of the application of this approach in a socio-economic context, by postponing punishment for thieves due to starvation. This study uses a normative legal approach with a descriptive-analytical method and a review of maqasid sharia to examine the integration of restorative justice principles in national criminal law. The results of the study indicate that although restorative justice has a place in regulations, its implementation is still limited and faces normative and institutional challenges. Therefore, legislative reform is needed which includes the ratification of special laws, the integration of restorative justice principles in the Criminal Procedure Code Bill, and the expansion of the scope of cases that can be resolved through this mechanism. With a more systematic implementation, restorative justice can become an integral part of the criminal justice system in Indonesia, in line with the principles of Islamic law which emphasize the balance between justice, welfare, and social protection.

<span class="fontstyle0">In the context of law enforcement, the process of investigating criminal acts is one of the sub-systems in the criminal justice system in Indonesia, which has a significant and strategic position, because investigations are the main gate and the beginning of the criminal justice process. Civil Servant Investigators (PPNS) are also given the authority to carry out professional investigations, in addition to the investigative authority of Polri Investigators. The investigation authority becomes a problem after there are various antinomical or contradictory provisions. In that context, it is interesting to analyze by first discussing the position of PPNS based on the criminal justice system and then discussing the harmonization of the provisions<br />of PPNS authority with Polri investigators in an integrated criminal justice system. The research method used in this study is normative, using a statute approach and a conceptual approach.</span> <br /><br />

This paper aims to propose the implementation of electronic justice within the Indonesian criminal justice system, focusing on the reform of criminal law enforcement. The research methodology employed is normative legal research. The findings of the study reveal two key points. Firstly, it is crucial to regulate digital-based criminal justice at the legislative level, particularly through the reform of the Code of Criminal Procedure (KUHAP). The current implementation of electronic criminal trials presents challenges, and the legal foundation for conducting such trials is established by external entities rather than the legislative institution. Therefore, incorporating regulations on electronic criminal trials in future KUHAP reforms is vital to facilitate criminal law reform. As it stands, electronic criminal trials lack specific legal regulations. Secondly, the existing KUHAP does not sufficiently address the issue of technological advancements, as it cannot anticipate rapid changes in technology. Consequently, a legal framework should be established to address this issue. This framework should ensure the availability of modern technological devices and necessary resources to facilitate digital-based criminal justice. Additionally, it should introduce laws governing electronic courts and initiate legal reforms through the revision of Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning Criminal Procedure Law (KUHAP). To provide an example, the United States has regulated electronic criminal proceedings through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), which implements fiscal stimulus policies and allows for video conferencing in certain cases. Such regulations can serve as a reference point for the implementation of electronic criminal proceedings in Indonesia.