PERBEDAAN PUTUSAN PRAPID P.N. TARUTUNG NO. 6/PID.PRA/2020 DAN PUTUSAN PRAPID P.N. MEDAN NO. 5/PID.PRA/2021

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia No. 21/PUU-XII/2014,
date. 28/04/2015, expanded the prepid object regarding "the validity of the determination
of the suspect". One of the cases regarding testing the validity of the suspect
determination in this study was between the Pre-Trial Decision at the Tarutung District
Court No. 6/Pid.Pre/2020, date. 31/08/2020 which is different from the Medan District
Court No. 5/Pid.Pre/2021, date. 16/02/2021 An. Petitioner "P.S.H". The problems are:
Factors that influence the disparity in the pretrial decision on the determination of different
corruption suspects in the Prapid P.N.Trt Decision. No. 6/Pid.Pra/2020 with the Decision
of Prapid P.N.Mdn. No. 5/Pid.Pre/2021; and Analysis of legal considerations for the
disparity of the pretrial decision. This research is normative legal research, which is
descriptive analysis in nature. The Investigating Prosecutor at the North Sumatra
Prosecutor's Office has done this and corrected the entire series of investigations and
investigations, so the determination of the suspect he has determined is appropriate and
declared valid by the pretrial judge at the Medan District Court. In the context of the
investigation conducted by the Attorney General's Office Investigator Humbang
Hasundutan, it was actually only an error in the administration of investigations and
investigations. The administrative error, by setting the suspect first, instead of finding
sufficient evidence as ordered by law. Determination of suspects should be carried out
based on Article 183 jo. Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code jo.
Article 422 Regulation of the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia No. PERJA-
039/A/JA/10/2010 concerning Administrative and Technical Management of Cases of
Special Crimes.
Keywords: Pretrial; The validity of the determination of the suspect; District Court.