The Juridical Review of the Implementation of Pre-Prosecution Based on the Principle of Law and Justice to be Fast, Simple, and Light Cost

Abstract

Article 110 paragraph (4) Code of Criminal Procedure states "the investigation is considered completed if, within 14 days of the public prosecutor did not return the results of an investigation or if before that time expires has been no notification about it from the public prosecutor to the investigator". Article 138 Paragraph (2) "in terms of the results of the investigation is not yet complete, the public prosecutor returns the case file to the investigator with instructions on what to do to be completed and within a period of 14 days from the date of receipt of the file, the investigator should have reiterated the case file it to the public prosecutor ". Of both articles can be seen that there is an imbalance of formal criminal law enforcement process between the police and prosecution. In Article 110 paragraph (4) Criminal Procedure Code there are consequences investigative files considered complete if within 14 days of the public prosecutor did not return the results of the investigation to the investigator, while Article 138 paragraph (2) Criminal Procedure Code is of no consequence for the investigator, if more than 14 days Investigators do not return the case file to the Public Prosecutor. The problems of course is very detrimental for the accused. The absence limits the number of times the delivery or reimbursement dossier on a reciprocal basis of the investigator to the public prosecutor or vice versa, then the possibility can always happen, that on the basis of opinion of public prosecutor investigation results additional investigation is not yet complete, the case file could be protracted pacing from the investigator to the public prosecutor or vice versa. This raises the question: Does Article 110 in conjunction with Article 138 Criminal Procedure Code gives legal certainty to the suspects? and whether Article 110 in conjunction with Article 138 Criminal Procedure Code is in conformity with the principles of justice quick, simple, and inexpensive?. The method used in this paper uses normative juridical approach. Normative legal research methods is a procedure of scientific research to find out the truth based on the logic of the normative legal scholarship. Analyzing Article 110 in conjunction with Article 138 Criminal Procedure Code with other legislation is already in line with the principle of legal certainty and justice quick, simple, and inexpensive. Article 110 in conjunction with Article 138 of the Criminal Procedure Code has not provided legal certainty for suspects. In the absence of consequences for the investigator if within 14 days investigators did not return the case file to the public prosecutor later on it can be used as a loophole for police officers and suspects not to continue the case. In the Indonesian criminal justice system to know their expiry prosecution set forth in Articles 77 and 79 of the Criminal Code. The time period for the prosecution is limited by time, it will be used as a loophole for the suspect to avoid prosecution for himself that there is no legal certainty in criminal law enforcement. Article 110 in conjunction with Article 138 Criminal Procedure Code is not compatible with the principles of justice quick, simple and inexpensive. Keywords: Article 110 in conjunction with Article 138 Criminal Procedure Code, the principle of justice quick, simple, and inexpensive, the principle of legal certainty