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

Tidak Tersedia Deskripsi