Sujono
Marshal Suryadarma Aerospace University, East Jakarta, Indonesia

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

ANALYSIS OF THE PROSECUTOR'S WIREBREAKING AUTHORITY IN HANDLING TERRORISM CRIMES Kadek Sudhi Asthawa; Sujono; Rizky Pratama Putra Karo Karo
JILPR Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review Vol. 7 No. 3 (2026): Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review (JILPR), June 2026
Publisher : International Peneliti Ekonomi, Sosial dan Teknologi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56371/jirpl.v7i3.626

Abstract

This study analyzes the Attorney General's authority to wiretap in handling terrorism crimes from the perspective of the principle of justice in the Pancasila rule of law and its implications for the protection of human rights. Wiretapping is an exceptional and intrusive law enforcement instrument because it limits the right to privacy and confidentiality of communications. Therefore, its implementation must be based on clear authority, strict legal procedures, and effective oversight mechanisms. This study uses a normative legal research method with a statutory, conceptual, and analytical approach. The analysis was conducted on the Attorney General's Law, the Law on the Eradication of Terrorism Crimes, the new Criminal Procedure Code, and human rights protection instruments. The analytical framework uses the Pancasila rule of law theory, the theory of authority, and the theory of the right to privacy. The results of the study indicate that the Indonesian legal system positions wiretapping as a coercive measure that can only be carried out by institutions that have express authority from the law. The Attorney General's law enforcement intelligence authority does not explicitly include wiretapping authority. In the practice of counterterrorism, the Attorney General's Office plays more of a role as a user of wiretapping results. This lack of clarity in regulations has the potential to create legal uncertainty and the risk of human rights violations. Therefore, regulatory clarification and harmonization are needed to ensure that wiretapping authority aligns with the principles of justice, the Pancasila state based on law, and the protection of human rights.
ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF THE POLICE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST TERRORISM CRIMINAL ACTS Muhammad Ishaq Alkays; Sudarto; Sujono
JILPR Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review Vol. 7 No. 3 (2026): Journal Indonesia Law and Policy Review (JILPR), June 2026
Publisher : International Peneliti Ekonomi, Sosial dan Teknologi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56371/jirpl.v7i3.648

Abstract

Terrorism is an extraordinary crime that threatens national security, public safety, and the rule of law. The Poso region in Central Sulawesi has long been exposed to terrorist activities, particularly by the East Indonesia Mujahideen (MIT) group. In addressing this threat, the Indonesian National Police (Polri), through the Special Detachment 88 Anti-Terrorism Unit (Densus 88 AT), plays a crucial role in enforcing anti-terrorism laws. This study aims to analyze the law enforcement efforts carried out by Densus 88 AT in handling terrorism cases involving wanted persons (DPO) in Poso, as well as to examine the challenges faced from legal and human rights perspectives. The research applies a normative-empirical approach by combining statutory analysis, conceptual frameworks, and case studies, supported by primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings indicate that Indonesia has a strong legal framework for combating terrorism, particularly through Law Number 5 of 2018. Law enforcement efforts in Poso have been effective in enhancing security, as demonstrated by the successful neutralization of key terrorist actors. However, several challenges remain, including issues related to the criminal justice process, human rights protection, limited public participation, and coordination among institutions. In practice, obstacles are categorized into structural, substantive, and cultural aspects. Structural challenges include difficult geographical conditions and inter-agency coordination. Substantive issues involve debates over the use of force under special legal authority. Cultural barriers, such as low public trust, also hinder early detection and prevention. Therefore, counter-terrorism law enforcement must balance security, justice, legal certainty, and human rights to ensure effective and fair outcomes.