Legal Counsel Assistance in Court Proceedings in Criminal Cases

Rakhbir  Singh; Supardi; Handoyo  Prasetyo

doi:10.47353/lawpass.v2i1.66

Authors

Rakhbir Singh Faculty of Law, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta, Indonesia
Supardi Faculty of Law, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta, Indonesia
Handoyo Prasetyo Faculty of Law, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47353/lawpass.v2i1.66

Keywords:

Court Proceedings, Criminal Cases, Legal Assistance

Abstract

The Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) does not differentiate between ethnic groups or nationalities, ensuring that all individuals are treated equally before the court, whether in the District Court, High Court, or Supreme Court. Suspects or defendants are no longer viewed as "objects" but as "subjects" who possess rights and obligations, including the right to claim compensation or rehabilitation in cases of wrongful arrest, detention, prosecution, or legal judgment. The reality that many suspects/defendants are not accompanied by legal counsel during criminal proceedings raises significant questions about why the provisions of KUHAP are not adhered to. This thesis aims to analyze and elaborate on the regulations within KUHAP concerning the obligation of legal counsel to assist suspects/defendants in court proceedings and to analyze and elaborate on the rules that should govern the implementation of the obligation for legal counsel in criminal cases. The type of legal research employed in this work is normative legal research. This research is prescriptive in nature, aiming to provide a careful, comprehensive, and systematic description and analysis of the characteristics of individual or group behavior. Legal assistance by counsel is a fundamental right that must be fulfilled in every legal process, as stipulated in Article 56 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). Ironically, the hegemony of scientific studies tends to focus more on the subordination and compliance of citizens to the law rather than the subordination and compliance of law enforcement officials to the law itself. This obligation not only aims to protect the rights of suspects but also to ensure that the principles of justice and the protection of human rights are upheld within the criminal justice system in Indonesia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Angga, A., & Arifin, R. (2019). Penerapan Bantuan Hukum Bagi Masyarakat Kurang Mampu di Indonesia. DIVERSI: Jurnal Hukum, 4(2), 218-236.

Ganindra, D.D.M. (2020, August 20). Akibat Hukum Tidak Dilaksanakannya Pasal 56 Kuhap Terkait Kewajiban Hakim Untuk Menunjuk Penasehat Hukum Bagi Terdakwa Dalam Perkara Pidana. PN Sumedang. https://pn-sumedang.go.id/akibat-hukum-tidak-dilaksanakannya-pasal-56-kuhap-tentang-penunjukkan-penasihat-hukum-bagi-terdakwa

Grady, J. S., Her, M., Moreno, G., Perez, C., & Yelinek, J. (2019). Emotions in storybooks: A comparison of storybooks that represent ethnic and racial groups in the United States. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8(3), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000185

Hamzah, A. (2010). Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Penerbit Sinar Grafika.

Harahap, Y. (2004) Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan Kuhap, Penyidikan dan Penuntutan, Cetakan Ke-Enam. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2004.

Harahap, Y. (2017). Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan Kuhap Penyidikan dan Penuntutan, Edisi Kedua. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

HukumOnline. (2023, July 28). Penjelasan tentang Perbedaan Peradi dengan Organisasi Advokat Lain? HukumOnline. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/penjelasan-tentang-perbedaan-peradi-dengan-organisasi-advokat-lain-lt64c3aa95e5e71/

Ilmia, P., Sulistiani, L., & Takariawan, A. (2023). IMPLEMENTASI PEMBERIAN BANTUAN HUKUM DALAM PASAL 56 AYAT (1) KUHAP DIHUBUNGKAN DENGAN HAK ATAS BANTUAN HUKUM. Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi, 11(1), 16-30.

Irawan, A., & Wahyono, W. (2024). Restorative Justice for Child Criminals in the New Criminal Code in Indonesia. Sanskara Hukum Dan HAM, 2(03), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.58812/shh.v2i03.373

Karsa, P. L. (2021). Potensi Konflik Norma Terhadap Persidangan Teleconference Peradilan Pidana Sebagai Adaptasi Baru Akibat Virus Covid-19. Perspektif: Kajian Masalah Hukum dan Pembangunan, 26(3), 178-185.

Lubis, M. S., & Haryanto, M. (2008). Pelanggaran Miranda Rule dalam praktik peradilan di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Juxtapose.

Purbacaraka, P. & Halim, A.R. (1982). Filsafat Hukum Pidana Dalam Tanya Jawab. Jakarta: Rajawali.

Putri, M. A. N., & Riwanto, A. (2023). BENTUK TANGGUNG JAWAB NEGARA DALAM PEMBERIAN BANTUAN HUKUM KEPADA MASYARAKAT MISKIN. Res Publica: Jurnal Hukum Kebijakan Publik, 7(3), 282-291.

Soekanto, S. (1986). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum, Cet.3, Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia.

Soekanto, S. (2010). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: UI-Press.

Soekanto, S. (2010). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia.

Tampubolon, B. (2016, January 7). Akibat Hukum Jika Hak Tersangka/Terdakwa Atas Bantuan Hukum Tak Dipenuhi Harus Diatur Dalam Undang-Undang. LBH Mawar Saron. http://lbhmawarsaron.or.id/home/akibat-hukum-jika-hak-tersangkaterdakwaatas-bantuan-hukum-tak-dipenuhi-harus-diatur-dalam-undang-undang/

Waluyo, B. (2015). Relevansi Doktrin Restorative Justice dalam Sistem Pemidanaan di Indonesia. Hasanuddin Law Review, 1(2), 210-226.