Reconstructing the Protection of Suspects’ Rights during Pre-Detention Examination under the Due Process of Law Principle in Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.0805/y706zh33Kata Kunci:
suspect rights; examination; detention; due process of law; 2025 Criminal Procedure CodeAbstrak
Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (the 2025
CPC), in force since 2 January 2026, strengthens the protection of
suspects’ rights during examination. At the same time, it lists among
the grounds for detention certain behaviours of the suspect during
examination, namely providing information inconsistent with the
facts and obstructing the examination (Article 100 paragraph (5)
letters b and c). This article analyses the regulation of suspects’
rights before detention, assesses it against the principle of due
process of law, and proposes a reconstruction of legal protection. It
employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, case,
and comparative approaches, with prescriptive analysis of legal
materials collected up to 30 September 2026. The findings are
threefold. First, the 2025 CPC builds preventive layers of protection:
notification of rights, access to counsel, a prohibition of intimidation,
accurate recording of statements, and the right to give or refuse a
statement. Second, the wording of letters b and c leaves interpretive
space that may reach the exercise of the right of defence, creating
potential tension with Article 142 and with the principles of legality,
proportionality,
and
necessity.
Third, a five-dimensional
reconstruction (normative, procedural, evidentiary, institutional, and
remedial) is needed, comprising objective interpretive parameters,
audio-visual recording, effective legal assistance, concrete factual
reasoning in detention orders, and review of the legal consequences
of violations.
Unduhan
Referensi
ANTARA. (2026). DPR jelaskan argumentasi penahanan dalam KUHAP baru di sidang MK. Diakses 30 September 2026, dari https://www.antaranews.com/berita/5736100/dpr-jelaskan-argumentasi-penahanan-dalam-kuhap-baru-di-sidang-mk
Arief, B. N. (2008). Bunga rampai kebijakan hukum pidana: Perkembangan penyusunan KUHP baru. Kencana.
Ashworth, A. (2006). Four threats to the presumption of innocence. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 10(4), 241–279.
Ashworth, A., & Redmayne, M. (2010). The criminal process (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Atmasasmita, R. (2010). Sistem peradilan pidana kontemporer. Kencana.
Azis, Muhammad Abdul, and Pujiyono. “Causative-Victim Tracing for Integrative Criminal Policy on AI Deepfake Face and Voice Crimes in Indonesia.” KRTHA BHAYANGKARA 20, no. 2 (2026): 518–537. https://doi.org/10.31599/krtha.v20i2.5666.
Daly, Y., Pivaty, A., Marchesi, D., & ter Vrugt, P. (2021). Human rights protections in drawing inferences from criminal suspects’ silence. Human Rights Law Review, 21(3), 696–723. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab006
Dicey, A. V. (1959). Introduction to the study of the law of the constitution (10th ed.). Macmillan.
Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings. Official Journal of the European Union, L 65.
Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings. Official Journal of the European Union, L 294.
DPR RI. (2026, 10 September). KUHAP 2025 perkuat kepastian hukum penahanan dan cegah kesewenang-wenangan aparat. Diakses 30 September 2026, dari https://emedia.dpr.go.id/news/2026/09/10/kuhap-2025-perkuat-kepastian-hukum-penahanan-dan-cegah-kesewenang-wenangan-aparat
Friedman, L. M. (1975). The legal system: A social science perspective. Russell Sage Foundation.
Gunawan, F., Sudarmanto, K., Sukarna, K., & Soegianto, S. (2024). Peran bantuan hukum terhadap tersangka dalam proses penyidikan. Jurnal USM Law Review, 7(3), 2042–2053.
Hadjon, P. M. (1987). Perlindungan hukum bagi rakyat di Indonesia. Bina Ilmu.
Harahap, M. Y. (2016). Pembahasan permasalahan dan penerapan KUHAP: Penyidikan dan penuntutan. Sinar Grafika.
Hasibuan, Edi Saputra, and Adi Nur Rohman. “Scientific Crime Investigation and Police Reform in Indonesia: Integrating Technology, Law, and Islamic Ethics for Institutional Transformation.” Legal Transformation in Muslim Societies 2, no. 3 (2025): 18–36. https://repository.ubharajaya.ac.id/37477/1/17.%20LTIMS%20Vol%202%20Iss%203%20Art%202.pdf.
Hasibuan, K., Panjaitan, B. S., & Harahap, A. M. (2024). RUU KUHAP: Tantangan dan harmonisasi antara asas due process of law dan criminal justice system di Indonesia. Jurnal Riset Rumpun Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Humaniora, 3(2), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.55606/jurrish.v3i2.6023
Hasibuan, M. N. P., & Prasetyo, M. H. (2022). Kedudukan advokat dalam sistem peradilan pidana di Indonesia. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 7(1), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v7i1.4629
Hukumonline. (2026). Dari kekhawatiran ke kepastian: Wajah baru penahanan dalam KUHAP baru. Diakses 30 September 2026, dari https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/dari-kekhawatiran-ke-kepastian--wajah-baru-penahanan-dalam-kuhap-baru-lt6992db5ee22a9/
Human Rights Committee. (2014). General comment No. 35: Article 9 (Liberty and security of person) (CCPR/C/GC/35). United Nations.
Human Rights Committee. (2007). General comment No. 32: Article 14, Right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial (CCPR/C/GC/32). United Nations.
Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], Nos. 50541/08, 50571/08, 50573/08 and 40351/09 (European Court of Human Rights, 2016).
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, December 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171.
Jackson, J. D., & Summers, S. J. (2012). Silence and the privilege against self-incrimination. In The internationalisation of criminal evidence: Beyond the common law and civil law traditions (pp. 241–284). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139093606.012
John Murray v. the United Kingdom [GC], No. 18731/91 (European Court of Human Rights, 1996).
Joseph, S., & Castan, M. (2013). The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Cases, materials, and commentary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Kania, D., Ludiana, T., & Hidayat, A. A. (2026). The right to remain silent vs. defendant statements: Examining Indonesia’s new Criminal Procedure Code. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, 26(2), 200–219. https://doi.org/10.20884/1.jdh.2026.26.2.17777
Karianga, I., & Hutapea, P. K. (2020). Prinsip Miranda rules “the right to remain silent” dalam perspektif perbandingan hukum. Media Iuris, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.20473/mi.v2i3.17375
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2026a, 4 Agustus). Risalah sidang Permohonan Nomor 285/PUU-XXIV/2026. https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/risalah/14752_Risalah-pdf_PERMOHONAN%20NOMOR%20285.PUU-XXIV.2026%20tgl.%204%20Agustus%202026.pdf
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2026b, 13 Maret). DPR dan Pemerintah minta penundaan sidang uji KUHAP. https://www.mkri.id/berita/dpr-dan-pemerintah-minta-penundaan-sidang-uji-kuhap-24767
MariNews. (2026). Wajah baru aturan penahanan dalam KUHAP 2025: Apa saja yang berubah? Diakses 30 September 2026, dari https://marinews.mahkamahagung.go.id/artikel/wajah-baru-aturan-penahanan-dalam-kuhap-2025-0MN
Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian hukum (Edisi revisi). Kencana.
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
Muammar, & Baharuddin, W. (2022). Prinsip Miranda rule sebagai hak asasi tersangka dalam sistem peradilan pidana Indonesia. PATTIMURA Legal Journal, 1(3), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.47268/pela.v1i3.7504
Muladi. (2002). Hak asasi manusia, politik dan sistem peradilan pidana. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Nowak, M. (2005). U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR commentary (2nd rev. ed.). N. P. Engel.
Packer, H. L. (1968). The limits of the criminal sanction. Stanford University Press.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014.
Reksodiputro, M. (1994). Sistem peradilan pidana Indonesia: Melihat kepada kejahatan dan penegakan hukum dalam batas-batas toleransi. Pusat Pelayanan Keadilan dan Pengabdian Hukum Universitas Indonesia.
Salduz v. Turkey [GC], No. 36391/02 (European Court of Human Rights, 2008).
Saputra, R., Lufsiana, L., & Negara, D. S. (2025). Reformasi hukum acara pidana: Menyongsong KUHAP baru. Langgam Pustaka.
Saunders v. the United Kingdom [GC], No. 19187/91 (European Court of Human Rights, 1996).
Setyawan, Muhammad Hendra, Lina Sinaulan, Edi Saputra Hasibuan, and Diana Fitriana. “The Effectiveness of Chemical Castration Sanctions for Perpetrators of Sexual Violence against Children from a Human Rights Perspective: A Study of Sexual Violence Cases in Indonesia.” Jurnal Axioma Lexprima 1, no. 3 (2026): 272–290. https://doi.org/10.0805/eb57z897.
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2015). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat. Rajawali Pers.
Susilo, E., Din, M., Suhaimi, & Mansur, T. M. (2025). Access to justice: An effective pretrial model to guarantee the right to defense for suspects in Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan, 14(2), 317–350. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.14.2.2025.317-350
Tanmadibrata, R. (2026). Konstruksi hak bantuan hukum dalam KUHAP 2025 dan implikasinya terhadap sistem peradilan pidana. Jurnal Sosial Teknologi, 6(2).
ter Vrugt, P. (2021). A pragmatic attitude: The right to silence in the Netherlands. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 12(3), 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844211028312
Trechsel, S. (2005). Human rights in criminal proceedings. Oxford University Press.
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2005 tentang Pengesahan International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2011 tentang Bantuan Hukum.
Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2003 tentang Advokat.
Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2025 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana.
Undang-Undang Nomor 39 Tahun 1999 tentang Hak Asasi Manusia.
Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1998 tentang Pengesahan Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana.
Wiguna, A. A. P. S., Sepud, I. M., & Sujana, I. N. (2020). Hak-hak tersangka (Miranda rule) pada tahap penyidikan dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana. Jurnal Konstruksi Hukum, 1(1), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.22225/jkh.1.1.2128.51-56
