PEMERIKSAAN ALAT BUKTI DALAM PENETAPAN TERSANGKA BERDASARKAN PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 21/PUU-IV/2014 DIPERSIDANGAN PRAPERADILAN DIKAITKAN DENGAN TUJUAN PRAPERADILAN

Abstract

Pretrial in Indonesia has been regulated through Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning
the Code of Criminal Procedure. Pretrial institutions are intended to test the lawfulness or
lawfulness of an arrest and/or detention, the lawfulness of stopping investigations or stopping
prosecutions, and requests for compensation or rehabilitation, so that law enforcement
officials are not arbitrary in carrying out their duties. Over time the authority of law

enforcement then increased with the birth of Constitutional Court Decision Number 21 / PUU-
IV / 2014, the decision stated that the authority of pretrial institutions included also in terms

of testing the validity or not of the determination of a suspect someone. So that pretrial court
judges must then focus the examination process on evidence, which is then used as a guideline
to assess whether the actions of law enforcement officials in the investigation and prosecution
stage are legitimate or not someone is determined to be a suspect. However, in fact there is no
consistency in the decisions of pretrial judges where in some cases evidence is tested for
relevance and in some cases the judge does not test it or can be mentioned as long as there are
two pieces of evidence alone are enough to establish a person as a suspect Therefore it needs
to be studied stimulantly first, b How is the implementation of cases in pretrial trials in the
examination of evidence in the determination of suspects based on the decision of the
Constitutional Court Number 21 / PUU-IV / 2014, second, the ideal formulation of the
examination of evidence in the determination of suspects at pretrial hearings in Indonesia.
This research is a normative legal research or known as legal research, namely by
examining literature materials (secondary data) that have a relationship with the problems
studied assisted by primary, secondary and tertiary data. This study used qualitative data
analysis that elaborated descriptively from the data obtained.
From the results of the study, it was concluded that, First, the implementation of the
Constitutional Court decision Number 21 / PUU-IV / 2014 is the absence of procedures from
judges in deciding pretrial cases where in some cases the judges check the validity or relevance
of evidence and some do not check, Second, It is necessary to reform the criminal law by
formulating an ideal concept for the face of Indonesian pretrial related to the obligation of
judges to examine the relevance of evidence and the obligation to examine potential suspects.
Keywords: Pretrial – Evidence – Suspect Determination