Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Profesi advokat sebagai penegak hukum memiliki tanggung jawab untuk menjaga kehormatan dan wibawa peradilan. Namun, dalam praktiknya masih ditemukan perilaku advokat yang tergolong Contempt of Court, yaitu tindakan yang merendahkan martabat pengadilan atau mengganggu jalannya persidangan. Hal ini dipengaruhi oleh belum adanya pengaturan hukum yang mengatur mengenai Contempt of Court di Indonesia walaupun ada beberapa Pasal yang dapat dikaitkan sebagai Contempt of Court yaitu Pasal 217 KUHP 1 Tahun 1946, serta Pasal 279 KUHP 1 Tahun 2023. Maka dari itu, penelitian ini merumuskan dua masalah utama, yaitu: bagaimana pengaturan hukum dan bentuk-bentuk perilaku advokat yang dapat dikategorikan sebagai Contempt of Court, serta bagaimana mekanisme penegakan sanksi terhadap advokat yang melakukan Contempt of Court dalam sistem hukum Indonesia.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan dasar hukum serta batasan perilaku advokat yang termasuk dalam kategori Contempt of Court, dan menganalisis mekanisme penegakan sanksinya baik secara kode etik maupun secara peradilan pidana.

Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan kasus. Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan dan diperkuat dengan wawancara oleh hakim serta aparat penegak hukum lainnya, kemudian dianalisis secara kualitatif dengan menafsirkan norma hukum yang relevan dan prinsip etika profesi advokat.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pengaturan mengenai Contempt of Court di Indonesia masih tersebar dalam beberapa peraturan, seperti Pasal 207, Pasal 217 dan Pasal lainnya dalam KUHP 1 Tahun 1946, serta Pasal 278 sampai dengan Pasal 299 KUHP 1 Tahun 2023. Bentuk perilaku advokat yang termasuk kategori tersebut meliputi ucapan atau tindakan yang mengganggu ketertiban sidang, tidak menghormati hakim, atau merendahkan martabat pengadilan. Penegakan sanksi dilakukan melalui mekanisme kode etik dan peradilan pidana.

Disarankan agar dibentuk undang-undang khusus tentang Contempt of Court untuk memberikan kepastian hukum dan mempertegas batasan perilaku advokat di ruang sidang. Selain itu, organisasi profesi advokat perlu memperkuat penegakan kode etik dan lembaga peradilan harus mengoptimalkan penerapan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 5 Tahun 2020 tentang Protokol Persidangan.

The legal profession, as an integral component of law enforcement, bears the responsibility to uphold the dignity and authority of the judiciary. However, in practice, there are still instances of advocates engaging in conduct that may be classified as Contempt of Court, namely actions that demean the court’s dignity or disrupt the course of judicial proceedings. This issue is partly attributable to the absence of a comprehensive legal framework specifically regulating Contempt of Court in Indonesia, notwithstanding the existence of several provisions that may be construed as such, including Article 217 of the Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 1946) and Article 279 of the Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023). Accordingly, this research formulates two principal issues: first, how the legal framework and forms of advocate conduct may be categorized as Contempt of Court; and second, how the mechanism for enforcing sanctions against advocates who commit Contempt of Court operates within the Indonesian legal system. This study aims to elucidate the legal basis and the boundaries of advocate conduct that fall within the category of Contempt of Court, as well as to analyze the mechanisms for enforcing sanctions, both under the advocate’s code of ethics and within the criminal justice system. The research employs a normative juridical method, utilizing statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Data are obtained through library research and supported by interviews with judges and other law enforcement officials, and subsequently analyzed qualitatively by interpreting relevant legal norms and principles of professional ethics governing advocates. The findings indicate that the regulation of Contempt of Court in Indonesia remains dispersed across several legal provisions, such as Articles 207, 217, and other related provisions of the Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 1946), as well as Articles 278 through 299 of the Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023). Forms of advocate conduct that fall within this category include statements or actions that disrupt courtroom order, show disrespect toward judges, or undermine the dignity of the court. The enforcement of sanctions is carried out through both ethical disciplinary mechanisms and criminal proceedings. It is therefore recommended that a specific statute on Contempt of Court be enacted to provide legal certainty and to clearly delineate the boundaries of acceptable advocate conduct within court proceedings. Furthermore, professional advocate organizations should strengthen the enforcement of their codes of ethics, and the judiciary should optimize the implementation of Supreme Court Regulation No. 5 of 2020 concerning Courtroom Protocols.