Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Permintaan penundaan pembacaan tuntutan oleh kepolisian dan kejaksaan di pengadilan negeri jakarta utara abstrak mohd. andalusia masri dahlan darmawan i 2 3 1 kewenangan kepolisian sebagaiamana yang telah diatur dalam pasal 15 undang-undang nomor 2 tahun 2002 tentang kepolisian negara republik indonesia yang salah satu kewenangannya ialah memelihara keamanan dan ketertiban masyarakat, menegakkan hukum, dan. memberikan perlindungan, pengayoman, dan pelayanan kepada masyarakat. sedangkan kewenangan kejaksaan diatur dalam pasal 30 undang-undang nomor 16 tahun 2004 tentang kejaksaan republik indonesia. adapun kekuasaan kehakiman adalah kekuasaan negara yang merdeka untuk menyelenggarakan peradilan guna menegakkan hukum dan keadilan berdasarkan pancasila dan undang-undang dasar negara republik indonesia tahun 1945, demi terselenggaranya negara hukum republik indonesia. pengadilan negeri jakarta utara sebagai salah satu pelaku kekuasaan kehakiman menerima, memeriksa dan mengadili perkara dugaan penodaan agama yang dilakukan oleh basuki tjahaja purnama alias ahok. pada salah satu agenda persidangan tersebut, kapolda metro jaya mengirimkan surat permohonan penundaan sidang pembacaan tuntutan dan penuntut umum juga meminta penundaan sidang selama 2 (dua) minggu dengan alasan belum dapat menyelesaikan penyusunan surat tuntutan pidana di samping memperhatikan surat kapolda tersebut dan meminta agar sidang dilanjutkan setelah pemungutan suara pemilihan gubernur dki jakarta putaran 2 selesai. majelis hakim dalam perkara tersebut akhirnya menunda sidang. hal ini menimbulkan reaksi publik karena terkesan kepolisian mengintervensi peradilan, kejaksaan tidak profesional sehingga hakim tidak memiliki pilihan lain selain menunda sidang. penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan dasar hukum kewenangan kepolisian dan kejaksaan meminta penundaan pembacaan tuntutan dalam kasus penodaan agama di pengadilan negeri jakarta utara dan menjelaskan analisis terhadap permintaan penundaan pembacaan tuntutan oleh kepolisian dan kejaksaan dalam kasus penodaan agama di pengadilan negeri jakarta utara. penelitian ini dilakukan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan melakukan pendekatan terhadap asas-asas hukum dalam menganalisis permasalahan yang ada dan menganalisis hukum sebagai gejala 1 2 3 mahasiswa ketuakomisipembimbing anggotakomisipembimbing masyarakat atau perilaku yang berpola dan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau data sekunder. hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kepolisian tidak memiliki dasar hukum yang jelas dalam mengajukan permintaan penundaan sidang pembacaan tuntutan dalam kasus basuki tjahaja purnama alias ahok di pengadilan negeri jakarta utara. sedangkan dasar hukum kejaksaan mengajukan permintaan penundaan sidang didasarkan pada ketentuan pasal 182 ayat (1) huruf a kuhap yang memberikan kewenangan absolut kepada penuntut umum untuk mengajukan tuntutan pidana. permintaan penundaan sidang oleh kepolisian tanpa dasar hukum tersebut patut sangat bermuatan politis dengan tujuan menjaga elektabilitas ahok dalam pemilihan putaran kedua pilkada dki jakarta sehingga patut dipandang sebagai bentuk intervensi kepolisian terhadap proses persidangan yang memiliki konsekuensi hukum pidana berdasarkan ketentuan pasal 3 ayat (2) dan (3) undang-undang nomor 48 tahun 2009 tentang kekuasaan kehakiman. sedangkan permintaan penundaan sidang oleh penuntut umum selama 2 (dua) minggu dengan alasan belum dapat menyelesaikan penyusunan surat tuntutan pidana dan memperhatikan surat permintaan penundaan persidangan oleh kapolda metro jaya telah memunculkan kesan seolah penuntut umum tunduk pada permintaan kapolda metro jaya dan mencederai kepercayaan masyarakat terhadap proses penegakan hukum yang adil dan transparan. disarankan kepada aparat penegak kepolisian dalam menjalankan tugas agar sesuai dengan tugas dan kewenangannya dan tidak melakukan tindakan diluar kewenangan yang dapat dikualifikasikan sebagai tindakan mencampuri urusan peradilan. tugas pokok memelihara keamanan dan ketertiban masyarakat, menegakkan hukum, dan memberikan perlindungan, pengayoman dan pelayanan kepada masyarakat tidak dapat ditafsirkan dan diperluas pelaksanaannya dengan cara meminta penundaan dalam hal pembacaan tuntutan dipersidangan. akan tetapi harus dilakukan dengan cara-cara lain sedemikian rupa untuk memastikan keamanan dan ketertiban masyarakat tetap terjaga tanpa mencampuri urusan peradilan apalagi dalam hal persidangan. kepada kejaksaan disarankan supaya bekerja lebih teliti, bertanggung jawab dan profesional dalam pelaksanaan kewenangan penuntutan, segera menyelesaikan penyusunan surat tuntutan pidana dalam batas waktu yang ditetapkan majelis hakim, serta menghindari segala tindakan yang mengakibatkan tidak terlaksananya asas peradilan yang sederhana, cepat dan biaya ringan dalam proses persidangan. kata kunci: penundaan, intervensi, sidang, kekuasaan kehakiman, kewenangan. ii the request for postponement of the reading of criminal charge by police and prosecutors at north jakarta district court abstract mohd. andalusia masri dahlan darmawan iii 5 6 4 police authority has been regulated in article 15 of the law no. 2 of 2002 concerning state police of the republic of indonesia, which one of the authorities is to maintain security and public order, enforcing the law, as well as providing protection, aegis and services for the community. meanwhile, the authorities of prosecutor are regulated in article 30 of the law number 16 of 2004 concerning the public prosecution service of the republic of indonesia. judicial power is the power of an independent state to administer the judiciary in order to uphold law and justice based on pancasila and the 1945 constitution of the republic of indonesia, for the sake of implementing the state of law of the republic of indonesia. the north jakarta district court, as one of the actors of judicial power, received, examined and adjudicated the alleged blasphemy case committed by basuki tjahaja purnama also known as ahok. on one of the trial agendas, kapolda metro jaya (metro jaya regional police chief) sent a letter of request for postponement of the trial for the reading of the criminal charges and the public prosecutors also requested to postpone the trial for 2 (two) weeks because they had not already finished the drafting of the letter of criminal charges apart from paying attention to kapolda’s letter and they proposed a request that the trial to be continued after the second round of election for governor of dki jakarta was completed. the panel of judges in this case finally postponed the trial. this caused a public reaction because it seemed that the police was intervening the judiciary, the prosecutors was unprofessional so that the judge had no other option except to postpone the trial. this study aims to explain the legal basis of the authority of the police and the prosecutors in requesting a postponement of the reading of charges in the case of blasphemy at the north jakarta district court and to explain the analysis of the requests for postponement of the reading of charges by the police and the prosecutors in the case of blasphemy at the north jakarta district court. this research was conducted by using a normative juridical research method by performing the approach towards legal principles in analyzing existing problems and analyzing the law as a symptom of society or patterned behavior and by conducting the research on library materials or secondary data. 4 5 6 mahasiswa ketua komisi pembimbing anggota komisi pembimbing the results of this study show that the police do not have a clear legal basis in filing a request to postpone the trial for the reading of criminal charge in the case of basuki tjahaja purnama also known as ahok at the north jakarta district court. meanwhile, the legal basis for the prosecutor to file the request for postponement of trial is based on the provision of article 182 paragraph (1) letter a of the criminal procedure code (kuhap) which gives absolute authority to the public prosecutor to file criminal charges. the request to postpone the trial by the police without a legal basis is very appropriate to have political content with the aim of maintaining the electability of ahok in the second round of regional election for governor of dki jakarta so that it could be seen as a form of police intervention against the trial process which has consequences of criminal law based on the provision of article 3 paragraph (2) and (3) of the law number 48 of 2009 concerning judicial power. meanwhile, the request for postponement of the trial by the public prosecutors for 2 (two) weeks with the reason that they have not already finished the drafting of the letter of criminal charges and by paying attention to the request for postponement of the trial by kapolda metro jaya, this has created the impression that the prosecutors has complied with the request of kapolda metro jaya and has injured public’s confidence in a fair and transparent law enforcement process. the request to postpone the trial by the police without a legal basis should have political content with the aim of maintaining ahok's electability in the second round election of the dki jakarta regional election so that it should be seen as a form of police intervention in the trial process which has criminal legal consequences based on the provisions of article 3 paragraph (2) and ( 3) law number 48 of 2009 concerning judicial power. it is recommended that police enforcers in carrying out their duties should be in accordance with their duties and authorities as well as do not take actions outside their authority that can qualify as interfering in judicial affairs. the main task of maintaining security and public order, enforcing the law, as well as providing protection, aegis and services for the community cannot be interpreted and its implementation cannot be expanded by requesting a postponement for the reading of criminal charges at the trial. however, it must be done in other ways in such a way as to ensure public order and security is still maintained without interfering in judicial matters, especially in matters of trial. additionally, the prosecutors should be able to work more carefully, be responsible and professional in exercising its prosecution authority, and immediately finish the drafting of the letter of criminal charges within the time limit set by the panel of judges, as well as avoid all actions that result in the failure to carry out simple, fast and low cost judicial principles in the trial process. keywords: postponement, intervention, trial, judicial power, authority. iv