Malang (11/05/2015) HIMAKOPI (Student Association of Criminal Law) Faculty of Law UB, held a scientific discussion on the topic of “The determination test of the status of suspected In the Pre Trial”. The discussion was taking place in the lobby B FHUB on May 11th 2015, by presenting Fachrizal Afandi, S.Psi, SH, MH who is the expert in the field of criminal law. The discussion was moderated by Devika Beliani, who is is a law student who concentrates on criminal law.
The discussion was very interesting, it is evident from the enthusiasm of the students who attended the study by asking questions throughout the discussion so that the discussion went-out very attractive. The Speakers said that indeed related news lately about BG (Budi Gunawan) was at its peak in the mass media, however, he explained that as a law student, we have to look at the case from a legal perspective and not easily provocated by public opinion through the mass media. BG cases according to the speaker, there are several mistakes made by the judge, they are; as proof that exceed the authority; the judge stated that BG is not law enforcer, 80% of the proposed case was rejected while the judge only tested types of cases which constitute a formal truth, so it is very difficult to examine a single case in just 7 days; Judge Sarpin who leads in the case of BG is inconsistent because he extend the objects of pre-trial but at the same time he also narrowing the definition of qualifying objects of state officials; Pre-trial judge should have only assess whether the evidence is sufficient or not, and should not judge as though as the panel of judges in hearing evidence trial. The speaker added that the interpretation is permitted, as long as it does not load the new norm because the right to create a new norm is under the authority of MK (Constitutional Court) to review the material that is in line with the Constitution and Pancasila.
During the discussion, there are a lot of questions that came out from the audience, one of which is a student who concentrate on criminal law, Radhingga, he asked about what if the new provisions from judge is blasted with the pre-trial procedural law of KPK (Corruption Eradication Commission) are not allowed to do SP3 ?, and questions of Nandika which is related to how the restrictions the judge in giving interpretation of the law to make a decision ?.
At the end of the discussion session, the speakers and the academic community in HIMAKOPI agreed that Mahkamah Agung (Supreme Court) should issues a specific regulation related to the legal regulation of pre-trial. (Kr)