Keabsahan Penetapan Tersangka Tanpa Didukung Alat Bukti yang Cukup: Analisis terhadap Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 2/Pid.Pra/2024/PN Jkt.Sel dalam Perspektif Rechtsstaat VS Machtsstaat

Abstract

The designation of a suspect is a legal action that has significant implications for an individual's fundamental rights and therefore must be carried out in accordance with criminal procedural law and supported by sufficient preliminary evidence. However, in practice, suspects are sometimes designated without fulfilling the minimum evidentiary standard, as reflected in Pretrial Decision Number 2/Pid.Pra/2024/PN Jkt.Sel. This study aims to analyze the legal reasoning behind the court's declaration that the suspect designation was unlawful and to examine the proper procedure for designating a suspect under Indonesian positive law from the perspectives of rechtsstaat and machtsstaat. This research employs a normative legal research method using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches, analyzed descriptively through primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The findings indicate that the suspect designation was declared legally defective because it was not supported by at least two valid pieces of evidence at the time the designation was made, thereby violating the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, the principles of legality, legal certainty, and due process of law. Furthermore, to ensure the validity of a suspect designation, investigators must strictly comply with all procedural requirements, including preliminary inquiry, issuance of an investigation warrant, collection of at least two lawful pieces of evidence, case exposition, submission of the Notice of Commencement of Investigation, and protection of the suspect's legal rights. Therefore, the legitimacy of suspect designation must be grounded in strict adherence to legal procedures as an embodiment of the rechtsstaat principle and to prevent machtsstaat practices in criminal law enforcement.