Legal practitioner Maqdir Ismail proposed that political figures who become criminal suspects should not be detained before a court ruling.
He argued that detention should only be applied to suspects whose background is still unclear. If the suspect has been identified, detention is unnecessary until a decision and evidence are found.
Ismail made this statement during a public hearing on the revision of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) at Commission III of the House of Representatives (DPR) on Wednesday, Mar. 5, 2025.
Responding to this proposal, Dr. Muhammad Fatahillah Akbar, a Criminal Law Lecturer at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), rejected it.
“There should be no distinction between political figures and ordinary citizens. Equality before the law must be upheld,” he emphasized on Wednesday, Mar. 12, 2025.
According to the law, there is no special provision for political figures.
Although the law governing the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR), DPR, the Regional Representative Council (DPD), and the Regional Legislative Council (DPRD) states that investigations involving legislative members must have presidential approval, this does not apply in some instances, including corruption.
For Dr. Akbar, political figure suspects are just as risky as any other suspect. Regardless of the alleged crime, political figures are particularly likely to interfere with legal proceedings.
“The possession of power and authority can potentially create obstacles during the investigation, such as witness tampering, destruction of evidence, and even manipulating events,” he explained.
He noted that suspects can be detained at various stages, from police investigation to prosecution by the attorney general to judicial examination by judges.
According to Article 21, numbers (1) and (4) of the KUHAP, detention is based on two factors.
Subjective reasons include the risk of fleeing, repeating the offense, or destroying evidence. Objective reasons involve a minimum sentence of five years or more.
“Detention is a matter of discretion, not obligation. Not all crimes result in detention, and even if they meet the objective requirement of a five-year sentence or more, they must also meet subjective criteria,” Dr. Akbar stated.
The length of detention can vary depending on the legal process.
During the investigation phase, detention can last up to 20 days and may be extended to 40 days.
The higher the stage of the case, the longer the maximum detention period that can be applied.
“In total, a suspect can be detained for a maximum of 400 days during the trial process,” he elaborated.
In his view, there is no need for a provision in the current KUHAP that exempts political figures from detention.
However, there are key points that generally need improvement.
Parameters should be established to grant permission to detain suspects so that the authority to detain can be exercised selectively.
“I propose that detention should be done selectively. The Chief of the District Court (KPN) should have risk parameters for detention,” Dr. Akbar suggested.
The revision of KUHAP is one of the DPR’s initiative powers. Several criminal provisions will be reviewed, selected, or added to facilitate and improve law enforcement effectiveness.
DPR aims to complete the KUHAP draft by April 2025 and to begin discussions with the government to establish balanced, equal, and transparent laws.
Author: Tasya
Editor: Gusti Grehenson
Post-editor: Lintang
Image: Jendelahukum.com