Pretrial Reform in Indonesia: A Study of Pretrial Hearings at the Sharia Court of Aceh Province

Abstrak

This study aims to examine pretrial as stated in the Code of Criminal Procedure. This study is a normative legal study using a statutory approach and examines dozens of court decisions related to pretrial. Based on the results of this study, it is concluded that the current pretrial institution still has weaknesses, namely unclear procedural law, passive and post factum testing, the application is dropped after the main case is delegated, there is no legal remedy, the examination is only formal-administrative. The main cause of these weaknesses is because the Criminal Procedure Code adheres to the principle of functional differentiation, which strictly divides authority between the criminal justice subsystems. The next conclusion is that the ideal court supervision of criminal justice is a concept of supervision that is in the middle between the interests of the state to enforce the law and the interests of the community whose rights must be guaranteed so that they cannot be arbitrarily taken away. This supervision is carried out by the Commissioner Judge who has the authority to materially test all actions of other criminal justice subsystems from the pre-adjudication stage to the post-adjudication stage. From this research, it is suggested that in the upcoming update of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is necessary to change the design of the criminal justice system from functional differentiation to court centric or centered on the court.