The Role of Investigators in Exercising Detention Powers Amid Indigenous Cultural Norms

Abstract

The authority of police investigators to detain suspects of criminal acts in accordance with Article 21 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code by fulfilling the objective and subjective requirements. Objective requirements can be seen in Article 21 paragraph (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which stipulates that detention can only be applied to suspects or defendants who have committed a crime and/or attempted crime, as well as the provision of assistance.

Introduction

Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution states that: "The Republic of Indonesia is a state based on law". This means that there is normative and empirical recognition of the principle of the supremacy of law, all problems are resolved with the law as the highest guideline. 1

detention according to the Criminal Procedure Code can be seen in Article 1 Point 21 in conjunction with Article 20 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Detention is the placement of a suspect or defendant in a certain place by an investigator or public prosecutor or judge with his/her determination, in the case according to the method regulated in this law. 2Certain considerations often influence decision-making, so that the decision-making of the Police in conducting an investigation, especially the detention of someone suspected of having committed a crime, can be based on a Police report, valid evidence (Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code) from the process of understanding by the investigator. Law enforcement by the Police in the context of combating crime and maintaining public security and order can be viewed as a law enforcement activity in the criminal justice system depending on the policy-making of the investigator/assistant investigator 3

Method

This research uses normative research methods and empirical research, where normative research emphasizes laws and other regulations that are conceptualized as what is written in statutory regulations (law in book). Meanwhile, in empirical legal research, the law is conceptualized as it is operated by society in its daily life. 4

Discussion

Law enforcement factors that underlie investigators' decision to make a detention at the Jayapura Police Resort. Article 21 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code which reads:

"A detention order or further detention order is issued against a suspect or defendant who is strongly suspected of committing a crime based on sufficient evidence, in this case there are circumstances that give rise to concerns that the suspect or defendant will flee, damage or remove evidence and/or repeat the crime."

Based on Article 21 of the Criminal Procedure Code, there are several conditions for detaining a suspect, namely: 5

Objective Conditions

The objective detention requirements have dimensions that are expressly regulated in law. Regulations relating to objective requirements can be found in Article 21 paragraph (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which stipulates that detention can only be applied to suspects or defendants who have committed a criminal act and/or attempted criminal act, as well as providing assistance in the following cases: 5

Criminal acts that are punishable by imprisonment of five years or more or Criminal acts regulated in Article 282 paragraph (3), Article 296, Article 335 paragraph (1), Article 351 paragraph (1), Article 353 paragraph (1), Article 2

372, article 378, article, 379a, article 453, article 454, article 455, article 459, article 480 and article 506 of the Criminal Procedure Code, article 25 and article 26 of the Rechtenordonnantie, article 1, article 2 and article 4 of the Immigration Crimes Act.

Subjective conditions

The Criminal Procedure Law states that a suspect can be detained if the investigator has strong suspicions based on sufficient evidence and the investigator has concerns such as: 6

Concerns that the suspect will escape

The fear of suspects running away is caused by the unclear origin of the suspect or the unclear identity of the suspect. For example, not having a permanent residence or an unclear place of residence. This means that investigators will have difficulty when calling the suspect for further examination, when they look for his residence it turns out that the suspect is no longer there or has run away, which can later hinder the examination process 7.

The suspect's concern about destroying evidence

Investigators' concerns that suspects will destroy evidence are usually 8due to the fact that the evidence found by investigators is not sufficient, so the suspect must be detained, so that in the investigation process the investigators can get clues from the suspect's statement and thus find other evidence.

The suspect's concern that he will repeat his actions.

This concern arises because there is no guarantee from the suspect, either from his family or legal counsel. The investigator himself cannot guarantee that someone will repeat the crime, so it is sufficient to make a statement that the suspect will not repeat his actions. 9

Based on the interview results, seen from the technical implementation aspect, the use of subjective reasons alone without considering objective reasons is very detrimental to the suspect, because it is based on the investigator's own initiative without considering other reasons so that the suspect's rights are often ignored or taken away. Therefore, officials who are authorized to implement regulations to carry out detention using subjective reasons must also be based on a situation with certain considerations so that the detention can guarantee the suspect's basic rights.

In line with that, Dominggus Monim as an investigator at Jayapura Police stated that there were three (3) reasons that influenced the detention. The reasons that occurred were: 10

Operational reasons

Operational reasons are closely related to the investigator's belief in the suspect/defendant, which is the subjective reason for detention, such as the suspect's status, 11whether he/she is still a child, whether there has been previous reconciliation with the victim, whether there is guarantee from other people, and whether there are any medical obstacles in the suspect's case.

Legal reasons

This reason is used by investigators because the law itself has determined the articles of criminal acts under which detention can be carried out. 12From the results of interviews, the objective basis for the reasons is determined in Article 21 paragraph (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code which stipulates that detention can only be imposed on someone who commits a crime and/or attempts or provides assistance in a crime.

Sociological reasons This reason focuses more on the type of case that attracts public attention, for example a grandmother who steals chocolate and is arrested, there are also school children who are accused of stealing sandals and therefore are not arrested. 13

The detention period at the investigation, prosecution and trial levels and the Supreme Court are regulated in Articles 24 to 29 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 14At the investigation level, it is regulated in Article 24 paragraph (1) and (2) the maximum period is 20 days and can be extended by the public prosecutor for a maximum of 40 days. At the prosecution level, it is regulated in Article 25 paragraph (1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the maximum period is 20 days and can be extended by the Head of the District Court for a maximum of 30 days.

At the level of examination by the District Court, it is regulated in Article 26 paragraph (1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the maximum detention period is 30 days and can be extended by the Head of the District Court for 60 days.

At the high court examination level, it is regulated in Article 27 paragraph (1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the maximum detention period is 30 days and can be extended by the Chief Justice of the High Court for a maximum of 60 days.

At the cassation examination level, it is regulated in article 28 paragraphs (1) and (2) where the detention period is 50 days and can be extended by the Chief Justice for a maximum of 60 days.

In addition, Article 29 of the Criminal Procedure Code also regulates provisions regarding exceptions to the detention period.

In which case, it is possible to extend the detention period for a maximum of 60 days at each level, namely in the case where the suspect or defendant suffers from serious physical or mental disorders, or the case being examined is threatened with a prison sentence of 9 years or more.

Detention is a restriction on a person's freedom, especially their freedom of movement, so detention should only be carried out if it is absolutely necessary for the sake of law enforcement.

According to an interview with Angina's mother, during her child's detention by the Jayapura Police, she was treated well. 15

During the detention process, investigators gave his son the freedom to see and visit his son in detention.

Conclusion

In accordance with the results of the research, the authority of police investigators to detain suspects of criminal acts in accordance with Article 21 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code must fulfill the objective and subjective requirements. The objective requirements can be seen in Article 21 paragraph (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which stipulates that detention can only be applied to suspects or defendants who have committed criminal acts and/or attempted criminal acts, as well as the provision of assistance.