<![CDATA[Indonesia is a state founded on the rule of law in which the criminal justice process increasingly depends on insiders willing to cooperate with law enforcement. The institution of the justice collaborator was designed for that purpose, yet its legal foundation in Indonesia remains scattered across a statute and a Supreme Court Circular Letter, leaving its standing contestable, particularly when the cooperating witness is also a direct perpetrator of a grave crime. This study examines two problems: the legal standing of witness protection for a justice collaborator in relation to the prevailing legislation in the Richard Eliezer case, and the forms of legal protection afforded to witnesses under Law Number 31 of 2014 on the Protection of Witnesses and Victims. The research applies a normative juridical method combining statute, case, and analytical approaches, drawing on primary legal materials, secondary literature, and the South Jakarta District Court ruling, analysed deductively. The findings show that Eliezer’s standing as a justice collaborator was established through judicial discretion that bridged a statutory gap, because Circular Letter Number 4 of 2011 does not expressly list premeditated murder and leaves the term not the main perpetrator undefined. Protection under Law Number 31 of 2014 takes the forms of physical and psychological safety, legal immunity, special procedural treatment, and rewards administered by the Witness and Victim Protection Agency, while the Circular Letter operates as organic regulation filling a legal vacuum. The study contributes a reasoned argument for elevating justice collaborator criteria into statute and strengthening the protection agency.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
