<![CDATA[Pre-prosecution procedures are often repeated, resulting in inefficiencies due to the continuous exchange of case files between investigators and public prosecutors. This situation stems from the normative vagueness in Article 109 paragraph (1) of Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code, particularly regarding the principle of coordination between investigators and prosecutors. Such procedural delays threaten legal certainty and violate suspects' human rights, particularly the right to freedom. This study aims to analyze the validity and binding force of the Circular Letter of the Deputy Attorney General for General Crimes Number SE-3/E/EJP/11/2020, which limits the issuance of P-19 instructions to only once during the pre-prosecution stage in general criminal cases. It also aims to assess the legal protection available to suspects when case files are returned multiple times. This research employs normative juridical methods using statutory and conceptual approaches. The findings show that while the Circular Letter provides guidance, it is not legally binding and thus easily deviated from in practice. The absence of strict limitations on the number of times a case file can be returned results in legal uncertainty and potential human rights violations. As a form of legal protection, investigators may issue an Order to Terminate Investigation (SP3), provide rehabilitation to the suspect, and improve coordination with prosecutors as mandated by Article 109. The study recommends codifying clear limits on pre-prosecution procedures to ensure efficiency and protect suspects’ rights.]]>
Copyrights © 2024
