Abstract

This article examines prosecutorial independence in Indonesia by analyzing three key aspects: the status of prosecutors as civil servants, the constitutional position of the Prosecution Service, and the role of prosecutors in the criminal justice system. It applies an interdisciplinary legal research method by reviewing laws, regulations, and relevant theories. Understanding these aspects helps assess whether the current legal framework adequately protects prosecutors from external influence and recognizes them as independent legal actors, similar to magistrates in other jurisdictions. Prosecutorial independence and impartiality ensure fairness in the criminal justice system. In Indonesia, prosecutors work as civil servants, similar to those in many inquisitorial systems. However, the law does not clearly define their role as magistrates with judicial authority. This legal uncertainty makes them vulnerable to political and hierarchical pressure, which can influence their decisions. A strong legal framework must protect prosecutors from external interference and allow them to act independently, as magistrates do in other systems. The findings highlight a critical issue: the law classifies prosecutors as civil servants but does not formally recognize them as independent legal actors. This gap allows political leaders, superiors, and other parties to interfere in prosecutorial decisions. Without strong legal protection, prosecutors struggle to maintain impartiality. This article argues that lawmakers must formally recognize prosecutors as independent legal actors, similar to magistrates. Legal reforms should strengthen prosecutorial independence and prevent undue influence. A clear legal framework will protect prosecutors, enhance public trust, and uphold justice in Indonesia.

There is no Figure or data content available for this article

References

• Afandi F, The Justice System Postman: The Indonesian Prosecution Service at Work. In M. Crouch, Cambridge University Press, 2019
• Afandi F, Maintaining Order : Public Prosecutors in Post-Authoritarian Countries, the Case of Indonesia, Universiteit Leiden, 2021
• Afandi F, “Penelitian Hukum Interdisipliner Reza Banakar: Urgensi dan Desain Penelitian Sosiolegal’, Undang: Jurnal Hukum, No. 5 (2022): 1
• Bunt HV, dan Gelder JL, ‘The Dutch Prosecution Service’ (2012) 41 Crime and Justice.
• Castberg, A. D. (1997). Prosecutorial Independence in Japan. UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal, 16(1), 38–87. https://doi.org/10.5070/P8161022109
• Crijns JH, De strafrechtelijke overeenkomst. De rechtsbetrekking met het Openbaar Ministerie op het grensvlak van publiek- en privaatrecht, Universiteit Leiden, 2010
• Dandruand Y, ‘The Role of Prosecutors in Promoting and Strengthening the Rule of Law’ [2007] Crime Law Soc Change.
• Eko/es, Pembahasan RUU Kejaksaan Siap Terima Masukan dari Masyarakat, dikutip dari laman: https://www.dpr.go.id/berita/detail/id/32622/t/Pembahasan+RUU+Kejaksaan +Siap+Terima+Masukan+dari+Masyarakat ; accessed on 7 September 2022
• Gelsthorpe and Padfield, Exercising Discretion: Decisionmaking in the Criminal Justice System and Beyond, Nijmegen: Wolf Legal, 2005
• Gershman BL, ‘Prosecutorial Decision making and Discretion in the Charging Function’ (2011) 62 (5) Hastings Law Journal.
• Gutmann J dan Voigt S, ‘The Independence of Prosecutors and Government Accountability’ (2019) 27 (1) Supreme Court Economic Review.
• Ilyas A, ’Independensi Penuntut Umum dalam Kebijakan Rencana Tuntutan Berjenjang untuk Menentukan Tuntutan Pidana’ (2021) 16 (1) Jurnal Pandadecta.
• Johnson DT, ‘Japan’s Prosecution System’ (2012) 41 (1) Crime & Justice.
• Jupp J, ‘Legal transplants as tools for post-conflict criminal law reform: justification and evaluation’ (2014) 3 (2) Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law.
• Lee SW, ‘The Discordant Combination of Civil-Law Prosecution System and Presidentialism: A Theoretical Framework’ (2014) 7 (2) Journal of Politics and Law.
• Langer M and Sklansky DA, Prosecutors and Democracy A Cross National Study, Cambridge University Press, 2017
• Marguery TP, Unity and Diversity of the Public Prosecution Services in Europe A study of the Czech , Dutch , French and Polish sytems, Groningen, 2008
• Mulyana A, Ambiguitas Profesi Jaksa Dalam Rumpun Aparatur Sipil Negara, RajaGrafindo Persada, 2021
• Surachman RM, Eksistensi Kejaksaan Dalam Konstitusi di Beberapa Negara ed. 1, Sinar Grafika, 2018
• Tak PJ, The Dutch Criminal Justice System: Organization and Operation, Boom Juridische Uitgevers, 200
• Tak PJ, Tasks and Powers of the Prosecution Services in the Eu Member States : Research Program: Administration of Justice, wolf legal publishers, 2004
• Tak PJ, Methods Of Diversion Used By The Prosecution Services In The Netherlands And Other Western European Countries, 135th International Senior Seminar Visiting Experts, 2008
• HV Bunt, JL Gelder, “The Dutch Prosecution Service”, Crime and Justice, (2012): 41
• Y Dandruand, “The Role of Prosecutors in Promoting and Strengthening the Rule of Law”, Crime Law Soc Change, (2007)
• BL Gershman, “Prosecutorial Decision making and Discretion in the Charging Function”, Hastings Law Journal, No. 5 (2011): 62
• J Gutmann , S Voigt, “The Independence of Prosecutors and Government Accountability”, Supreme Court Economic Review, No. 1 (2019): 27
• Michel, V. (2017). The role of prosecutorial independence and prosecutorial accountability in domestic human rights trials. Journal of Human Rights, 16(2), 193–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2015.1113864
• Mufrohim, Herawati R, “Independensi Lembaga Kejaksaan sebagai Legal Structure di dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana (Criminal Justice System) di Indonesia”, Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia, No. 2 (2020): 3
• R Nazriyah, “Pemberhentian Jaksa Agung Dan Hak Prerogatif Presiden”, Jurnal Konstitusi, No. 5 (2010): 7
• R Patra, “Urgensi Kejaksaan Diatur oleh Konstitusi”, Hasanuddin Law Review, No. 3 (2015): 1
• Reddi M, ‘Criminal Procedure’ (2021) 34 (1) South African Journal of Criminal Justice.
• Lundberg, A. (2019). Comment on “The Independence of Prosecutors and Government Accountability.” Supreme Court Economic Review, 27(1), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.1086/705362
• RP Sudirja, “Penguatan Kewenangan Penuntut Umum Melalui Pengesampingan Perkara Pidana Dengan Alasan Tertentu”, Jurnal Litigasi, No. 2 (2019): 20
• Toole, K. (2024). Prosecuting crime in the public interest : how tension between independence and accountability threatens the rule of law in Australia (First edition.). Hart Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781509973231
• Voigt, S., & Wulf, A. J. (2019). What makes prosecutors independent? Analysing the institutional determinants of prosecutorial independence. Journal of Institutional Economics, 15(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137417000212
• Zangari, J. (2023). Doing Justice: A Prosecutor’s Thoughts on Crime, Punishment, and the Rule of Law. Criminal Justice (1986), 38(1), 35–35.

How to Cite This

Article Metrics

Download Statistics

Other Statistics

Copyright and Permissions

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with Kosmik Hukum agree to the following terms:

1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Data Availability