INDEPENDENSI KEJAKSAAN DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA INDONESIA - Wibowo, Ari (STAIN Jurai Siwo Metro, 2015)
AbstrakPengacara adalah salah satu lembaga penting dalam penegakan hukum , sehingga dalam menjalankan fungsinya harus independen. Di Indonesia diposisikan di bawah kekuasaan eksekutif. Posisi yang dianggap rentan terhadap intervensi kekuasaan eksekutif dalam melaksanakan fungsi penegakan hukum. Untuk menjamin independensinya, pengacara harus dimasukkan dalam kekuasaan kehakiman. Selain itu, harus diberikan legitimasi oleh eksplisit dinyatakan dalam konstitusi untuk menjamin kemerdekaan kedua institusional dan fungsional. Sistem peradilan pidana sebagai sistem penegakan hukum, tidak berjalan secara optimal bahkan menjadi alat penguasa karena kedudukannya yang tersubordinasi oleh kekuasaan eksekutif. Sub-sistem pengadilan secara struktural dan fungsional berada di bawah kekuasaan eksekutif, sehingga perannya sebagai penegak hukum terlihat melayani kepentingan penguasa. Sub-sistem dalam sistem peradilan pidana (sub-sistem penyidikan, penuntutan dan pelaksana pidana) secara fungsional dan kelembagaan belum menujukkan adanya independensi karena secara struktural berada dibawah kekuasaan eksekutif. Sedangkan kekuasaan mengadili (pengadilan) sudah ditempatkan sebagai kekuasaan yang independen lepas dari kekuasaan eksekutif, baik secara organisasi kelembagaan, anggaran, kepegawaian dan sistem kerier dibawah satu atap (one roof system) dibawah Mahkamah Agung. Ketidakmandirian disebabkan kelembagaan yang tidak independen, kerancuan atau tumpang tindih substansi hukum dan faktor budaya hukum pelaksana sub-sistem peradilan pidana yang cenderung arogan, ego sentris, komersial dan melayani kepentingan-kepentingan pragmatis diluar tujuan penegakan hukum.Â Kata kunci : Pengacara, kemandirian, penegakan hukum, eksekutifÂ AbstractLawyer is one of the important institutions in law enforcement, so that in carrying out its functions it should be independent. In Indonesia it is positioned under the executive power where it is considered as vulnerable toward the intervention of executive power in carrying out law enforcement functions. To ensure its independence, the lawyer must be participated in the judicial power. Furthermore, it should be given legitimacy by explicitly stated in the Constitution to ensure the independence of both institutional and functional . The sistem of criminal justice which is applied as the law enforcement system doesnât not run optimally even become a ruler tool due to its position is subordinated by the executive power. The court Sub-system is structurally and functionally under the authority of the executive, so that its role as law enforcement authorities seems as only serve the interest of ruler. The Sub-systems within the criminal justice system (sub-system investigation, prosecution, and criminal executor) is functionally and institutionally not showed any independence because it is structurally Â under the executive control. While prosecuting authority (court) has been placed as an independent authority from the executive dominance, either institutional organization, budgets, personnel or kerier systems under one roof (one-roof system) under the Supreme Court. The dependence Â dominance which is caused as by the dependent institutions, confusion or overlapping law substance and law cultural factors of sub-system of criminal justice executor that tends to be arrogant, ego centric, commercial and serve pragmatic interests beyond the law enforcement purposes.Keywords: Lawyer, independence, law enforcement, executive