Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Ragam Pengabdian
Jelli Rita
Sekolah Tinggi Hukum Militer, Indonesia
Environmental Science Social Sciences Other

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
The Paradox of Connectivity Justice: The Hegemony of Splitsing and Fragmentation of Criminal Liability in Civilian-Military Mixed Criminal Cases Prastopo Prastopo; Jelli Rita; Ahmad Jaeni; Sugianor Sugianor
Jurnal Ragam Pengabdian Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): Mei-Agustus (Inprogress)
Publisher : Lembaga Teewan Journal Solutions

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62710/emhych12

Abstract

Connectivity justice is designed as an integrative mechanism for adjudicating criminal offences jointly committed by legal subjects falling under both general and military jurisdictions. In practice, however, the splitting of case files, or splitsing, in civilian-military mixed cases may transform connectivity from a unifying procedural forum into a merely declaratory norm with limited operational force. This article examines why splitsing may negate the ratio legis of connectivity justice, particularly in relation to equality before the law, due process of law, and the unity of criminal liability. The research applies a normative juridical method with descriptive-prescriptive analytical characteristics, using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Legal materials are collected through library research covering legislation, court decisions, doctrine, journal articles, books, and contemporary case materials. The article argues that splitsing in mixed civilian-military cases cannot be treated as a purely technical prosecutorial instrument because it affects forum allocation, evidentiary coherence, public access, and the construction of criminal responsibility. The novelty of this article lies in proposing a “limited-priority connectivity model”, which requires a connectivity trigger test, a dominant-interest test, joint case assessment, and written reasoned justification before any case splitting may be undertaken. This model is necessary to prevent splitsing from becoming an instrument of jurisdictional fragmentation.
The Due Process Paradox in the New Criminal Procedure Code: Expansion of Coercive Measures and an Integrated Judicial Oversight Model in the Investigation Stage Prastopo Prastopo; Jelli Rita; Ahmad Jaeni; Sugianor Sugianor
Jurnal Ragam Pengabdian Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): September-Desember "Community Empowerment Through Digital Literacy Programs to
Publisher : Lembaga Teewan Journal Solutions

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62710/6strmq61

Abstract

The enactment of Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code marks a substantial transformation of investigation and coercive measures. On the one hand, the new Code strengthens suspects’ rights, broadens pretrial review, requires at least two pieces of evidence for suspect designation and several restrictions on liberty, and provides more explicit safeguards for vulnerable groups. On the other hand, the catalogue of coercive measures is expanded to include suspect designation, arrest, detention, search, seizure, interception, examination of correspondence, blocking orders, and travel bans, thus preserving a broad space for state intervention into individual liberty. This article applies normative legal research with a descriptive-prescriptive analytical character, relying on secondary legal materials through library research and employing statutory and conceptual approaches. It argues that the central problem of the new Code does not merely concern the existence of rights-protective norms, but the consistency of judicial oversight over investigative discretion. By examining Constitutional Court Decision No. 21/PUU-XII/2014, contemporary pretrial practice on suspect designation, and the oversight architecture of the new Criminal Procedure Code, this article proposes an integrated judicial oversight model based on legality, necessity, proportionality, written reasons, judicial authorization, post factum review, exclusionary rules, and effective remedies. The model is necessary to ensure that the expansion of coercive powers does not reproduce crime-control dominance, but moves toward substantive due process of law.
Co-Authors Ahmad Jaeni Prastopo Prastopo Sugianor Sugianor