FORMULATION OF THE AUTHORITY CONTROL MECHANISM THE GENERAL PROSECUTOR RULE OUT ON THE CASE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST (SEPONEERING)

Abstract

Article 77 of Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, only states that: "The district court has the authority to examine and decide, in accordance with the provisions stipulated in this law concerning: a) Whether or not an arrest is legal, detention, termination of investigation or termination of prosecution; b) Compensation and/or rehabilitation for a person whose criminal case is terminated at the level of investigation or prosecution. In the explanation of Article 77 it is emphasized that "What is meant by "discontinuation of prosecution" does not include setting aside cases for the public interest which are the authority of the Attorney General. So in the future, the explanation of the article which limits the object of pretrial excluding the waiver of cases in the public interest (seponeering) must be examined by the Constitutional Court by stating that the explanation of the article is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and has no binding legal force. So that the formulation of the object of pretrial in the future in the RKUHAP must be formulated including whether or not the termination of prosecution is based on legal interests and/or public interest (seponeering). And even though the pretrial concept in the 2020 Criminal Procedure Code Bill has been replaced with the concept of a preliminary examining judge, the Attorney General's authority in overriding cases in the public interest (seponeering) must also be formulated as the authority of the Preliminary Examining Judge.