<![CDATA[This study examines the legal vacuum in the judicial supervision of criminal court judgment enforcement by public prosecutors and the formulation of ius constituendum in Indonesia. The problem arises because Indonesian criminal procedural law grants public prosecutors authority to execute final and binding criminal judgments but does not provide a clear mechanism for judicial supervision when execution is delayed or not carried out. This study aims to identify the factors causing the legal vacuum and formulate an ideal model of judicial supervision as ius constituendum. This study employs normative legal research using statutory, case, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Legal materials are analyzed qualitatively through systematic and teleological interpretation. The analysis applies Gustav Radbruch’s Theory of Legal Certainty, Aristotle’s Theory of Justice, and the Theory of Judicial Power and checks and balances. The findings indicate that the legal vacuum results from the absence of judicial control mechanisms, limited authority of the Supervising and Observing Judge, the absence of an objection mechanism, and unclear time limits and legal accountability for public prosecutors. Comparative analysis of German criminal procedural law demonstrates the importance of judicial control during execution. Accordingly, this study proposes reformulating Article 270 of the Criminal Procedure Code and expanding the authority of the Supervising and Observing Judge to supervise execution from the time a judgment becomes final until completion. This model aims to strengthen legal certainty, accountability, and judicial authority while maintaining the public prosecutor’s authority to execute criminal judgments.]]>
