Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Peraturan kepolisian negara republik indonesia (perpol) nomor 7 tahun 2022 tentang kode etik profesi (kep) dan komisi kode etik kepolisian negara republik indonesia (kkep). pelanggaran terhadap kep akan dilakukan persidangan oleh kkep, putusan kkep bersifat final dan mengikat atas persetujuan oleh pejabat pembentuk kkep/kkep banding (kapolda). limitatif waktu yang diberikan selama 30 (tiga puluh) hari kerja pembentuk komisi harus memberikan jawaban penjatuhan hukuman kepada terduga pelanggar, apabila dalam waktu tersebut belum memberikan jawaban atau persetujuan maka kapolda dianggap menyetujui rekomendasi kkep atau kkep banding sehingga kekuatan suatu putusan (kkep dan kkep banding) yang didasarkan pada proses persidangan yang layak, seyogianya tidak dapat dianulir sedemikian rupa layaknya kekuatan final dan mengikat (binding) di putusan hakim dalam peradilan umum yang telah final karena komisi tersebut dibentuk oleh pejabat (kapolda) itu sendiri. limitatif waktu yang ditentukan oleh ketentuan di perpol 7 tahun 2022 selama 30 (tiga puluh) hari kerja telah terabaikan, yang seharusnya sudah dilaksanakan putusan tersebut namun nyatanya dilakukan pencabutan dan perubahan sehingga fakta-fakta persidangan menjadi terabaikan dan keberadaan komisi hanya sebagai bentuk pemenuhan formil saja tanpa memiliki kekuatan final untuk mengeksekusi keputusan kkep/kkep banding serta batasan pendelegasian kewenangan yang dimiliki pembentuk komisi tidak diatur secara khusus. tujuan dalam penelitian ini adalah; pertama: mengkaji kesesuaian proses pencabutan putusan ptdh dengan teori hukum akibat dari kebijakan oleh dinas bagi anggota polri di polda aceh, yang kedua: untuk mengkaji praktik prinsip good policing governance yang dijalankan oleh kepolisian daerah aceh sebagai landasan dalam mencabut rekomendasi ptdh terhadap anggota polri di polda aceh, dan ketiga: akibat hukum yang ditimbulkan akibat ketidaksesuaian penerapan prinsip-prinsip dalam pelaksanaan ptdh bagi anggota polda aceh dari dinas polri. metode dalam penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yang juga sebagai konsep kaidah atau norma yang menjadi tolok ukur tingkah perilaku manusia yang sesuai dan pantas saat berhadapan dengan hukum. penelitian secara doktrinal yang juga dilandaskan sebagai yuridis normatif yaitu penelitian yang dilaksanakan dengan fokus utamanya adalah membedah teori-teori, konsep-konsep, asas-asas hukum dan peraturan perundang-undangan terkait dengan penelitian yang diangkat. dalam penelitian ini hukum dikonsepkan sebagai apa yang tertulis dalam peraturan perundang-undangan (law in the book). penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan untuk menghasilkan jawaban atas berbagai persoalan yang dikaji terutama pendekatan undang-undang (statute approach), pendekatan konsep (conceptual approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa rumusan, pertama: terkait pencabutan ptdh tanpa memperhatikan ketentuan yang berlaku serta diluar kewenangannya untuk melakukan pembatalan tersebut, menunjukkan belum terimplementasikannya asas kepastian hukum dan mengindikasikan adanya potensi penyalahgunaan wewenang (abuse of power) serta masih terdapat kelemahan dalam prosesnya. kedua: pembatalan ptdh dilakukan oleh kapolda aceh, terdapat aspek ketidaksesuaian penerapan prinsip good policing governance yang menyebabkan beberapa kegagalan yaitu: akuntabilitas yang diragukan: proses pencabutan ptdh tidak terbuka dan tidak sesuai prosedur sehingga mengindikasikan kurangnya transparansi dan kegagalan keadilan. ketiga: ketidaksesuaian dalam pelaksanaan prosedur pencabutan keputusan menyebabkan ketidakpastian hukum, sebagaimana diamanatkan oleh pasal 3 huruf b uu no. 30 tahun 2014 tentang administrasi pemerintahan. disarankan, pertama: pencabutan putusan ptdh setelah putusan inkrach memerlukan evaluasi dan perbaikan dalam pengawasan independent untuk dapat melakukan pencabutan putusan ptdh bagi anggota polri, guna memperkuat keadilan dan akuntabilitas dalam institusi kepolisian, sesuai dengan uu no. 2 tahun 2022 dan perpol no. 7 tahun 2022. kedua: peningkatan proses evaluasi dan verifikasi terhadap anggota polri sebelum melakukan pencabutan putusan ptdh dan ketiga: penguatan panduan serta ketentuan yang baku dalam peraturan atau pedoman internal polri tentang kriteria kelayakan pencabutan putusan ptdh setelah inkracht sehingga terwujudnya transparansi dan kepastian hukum.

Regulation of the National Police of the Republic of Indonesia (Perpol) Number 7 of 2022 concerning the Code of Professional Ethics (KEP) and the Police Code of Ethics Commission (KKEP). Pursuant to this regulation, any violation of the Code of Professional Ethics (KEP) shall be adjudicated by the Police Code of Ethics Commission (KKEP). The decision of the KKEP is final and binding, subject to the approval of the official who established the KKEP or the Appellate KKEP (in this case, the Regional Police Chief/Kapolda). The regulation stipulates a mandatory time limit of 30 (thirty) working days within which the Establishing Authority must issue a response regarding the imposition of disciplinary sanctions against the Alleged Violator. Failure to provide such a response within the stipulated timeframe shall be deemed as tacit approval of the KKEP or Appellate KKEP’s recommendation by the Kapolda. Accordingly, any decision rendered by the KKEP or the Appellate KKEP, grounded in due process and a legitimate adjudicatory proceeding, ought to be deemed irrevocable. It carries a final and binding legal character akin to that of a judicial ruling with permanent legal force (res judicata), especially considering that the Commission itself is constituted by the same official whose approval is required. However, in practice, the mandatory time limitation prescribed under Perpol Number 7 of 2022 has been disregarded. A decision which should have been executed within the said period was instead subjected to revocation and modification, thereby undermining the evidentiary findings and legal conclusions established during the ethical hearing. This situation raises serious concerns about the substantive authority of the Commission, reducing its function to mere formal compliance without actual enforcement power. Furthermore, the scope and limits of the delegatory authority vested in the Establishing Authority are not clearly or specifically regulated, resulting in legal uncertainty and a potential breach of the principle of legal certainty. The objectives of this research are as follows: First, to examine the conformity of the process of revoking the dishonorable discharge (PTDH) decision with legal theory, particularly in relation to the policy actions taken by the Police Administration toward members of the Indonesian National Police (Polri) in the Aceh Regional Police (Polda Aceh). Second, to analyze the application of the principles of Good Policing Governance implemented by the Aceh Regional Police as a foundation for revoking the PTDH recommendation imposed upon Polri personnel in Polda Aceh. Third, to assess the legal implications arising from the inconsistency in the application of principles governing the execution of PTDH measures against members of the Aceh Regional Police in the context of administrative decisions made by the police institution. The method employed in this study is normative legal research, which also serves as a conceptual framework of legal norms or principles that function as a standard for appropriate and proper human behavior when dealing with the law. This research is doctrinal in nature, grounded in a juridical-normative approach, focusing primarily on the analysis of legal theories, legal concepts, legal principles, and statutory regulations relevant to the subject matter under examination.In this context, the law is conceptualized as what is written in statutory regulations (law in the books). This study adopts several approaches to formulate answers to the legal issues under consideration, particularly the statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. The findings of this research indicate the following:First, the revocation of the dishonorable discharge (PTDH) was carried out without due regard to the applicable legal provisions and beyond the authority of the official who enacted the cancellation. This demonstrates the non-implementation of the principle of legal certainty and indicates a potential abuse of power, as well as procedural weaknesses within the process.Second, the revocation of the PTDH was executed by the Chief of the Aceh Regional Police (Kapolda Aceh), raising concerns regarding non-compliance with the principles of good policing governance, which led to several failures, including: Questionable accountability: The process of revoking the PTDH was neither transparent nor procedurally proper, thereby indicating a lack of openness and a failure to uphold justice. Third, the procedural irregularities in the revocation process resulted in legal uncertainty, which stands in contradiction to the mandate of Article 3(b) of Law Number 30 of 2014 on Government Administration, which upholds legal certainty as a fundamental principle in public administration. It is recommended as follows: First, the revocation of a dishonorable discharge (PTDH) decision after it has obtained permanent legal force (inkracht van gewijsde) requires evaluation and reform through the establishment of independent oversight mechanisms, in order to ensure that such revocations are conducted fairly and accountably within the police institution, in accordance with Law No. 2 of 2022 and PERPOL No. 7 of 2022. Second, there must be an enhancement of the evaluation and verification process for members of the Indonesian National Police (Polri) prior to the revocation of a PTDH decision. Third, it is necessary to strengthen the guidelines and standardized regulations within Polri’s internal framework concerning the criteria for the eligibility of PTDH revocations after a decision becomes final and binding, in order to ensure transparency and legal certainty.