Pembatasan Diskresi Penuntutan Pasca P-21 Melalui Mekanisme Praperadilan

Edy Nugroho; Endah Pujiastuti; Muhammad Junaidi; Muhammad Rizky Pratama Ar Rahim

doi:10.26623/jj.v4i2.14020

Authors

Nugroho Edy Magister Hukum, Universitas Semarang
Endah Pujiastuti Magister Hukum, Universitas Semarang
Muhammad Junaidi Magister Hukum, Universitas Semarang
Wijayono Hadi Sukrisno4 Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26623/jj.v4i2.14020

Keywords:

Diskresi Penuntutan, P-21, Praperadilan

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the limitation of prosecutorial discretion in terminating prosecution after a case file has been declared complete (P-21) through Pretrial Decision Number 1/Pid.Pra/2025/PN Pekalongan. The legal issue concerns the conflict between P-21 status, which signifies the fulfillment of prosecution requirements, and the subsequent termination of prosecution after the pre-prosecution stage has been completed. The urgency of this research lies in ensuring legal certainty, consistency in law enforcement, and the protection of the rights of all parties. This study employs a normative juridical method strengthened by empirical data using a statute approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. Data were collected through literature review, court decision analysis, and interviews. The findings reveal that the termination of prosecution after the issuance of P-21, without any new legal facts, contradicts Article 140 paragraph (2) of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, the principle of legal certainty, and due process of law. The pretrial decision confirms that P-21 status carries legal consequences that limit prosecutorial discretion in terminating prosecution. This study concludes that pretrial proceedings function as a judicial control mechanism over prosecutorial discretion. The novelty of this research lies in establishing P-21 status as a normative limitation on prosecutorial termination after the completion of the pre-prosecution stage.

Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis pembatasan diskresi Penuntut Umum dalam penghentian penuntutan setelah berkas perkara dinyatakan lengkap (P-21) melalui Putusan Praperadilan Nomor 1/Pid.Pra/2025/PN Pekalongan. Permasalahan hukum penelitian ini terletak pada konflik antara status P-21 yang menunjukkan terpenuhinya syarat penuntutan dengan penghentian penuntutan setelah tahap prapenuntutan selesai. Urgensi penelitian ini berkaitan dengan kebutuhan untuk menjamin kepastian hukum, konsistensi penegakan hukum, dan perlindungan hak para pihak. Penelitian menggunakan metode yuridis normatif yang diperkuat data empiris dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach), pendekatan kasus (case approach), dan pendekatan konseptual (conceptual approach). Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan, analisis putusan pengadilan, dan wawancara. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penghentian penuntutan setelah P-21 tanpa adanya fakta hukum baru bertentangan dengan Pasal 140 ayat (2) KUHAP, asas kepastian hukum, dan due process of law. Putusan praperadilan menegaskan bahwa status P-21 memiliki konsekuensi yuridis yang membatasi diskresi Penuntut Umum dalam menghentikan penuntutan. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa praperadilan berfungsi sebagai mekanisme kontrol yudisial terhadap penggunaan diskresi penuntutan. Kebaruan penelitian terletak pada penegasan bahwa status P-21 merupakan batas normatif terhadap penghentian penuntutan pasca prapenuntutan

References

Achmad, Andyna Susiawati, dan Astrid Athina Indradewi. “A Legal Review of Share Inheritance in Limited Liability Companies.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 10, no. 3 (2025): 346–62. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v10i3.12026.

Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Konstitusi dan Konstitusionalisme Indonesia. Pertama. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2015.

———. Negara Hukum dan Demokrasi. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2018.

———. Negara Hukum Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2018.

Atmasasmita, Romli. Sistem Peradilan Pidana Kontemporer. 3 ed. Jakarta: Kencana, 2018.

Bakhri, Syaiful. Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana, 2015.

Hadiyanto, Alwan. “The Urgency of Updating Criminal Code Procedure in Indonesia As an Answer to the Challenges of Modern Law Enforcement.” Jurnal USM Law Review 8, no. 3 (2025): 2842–60. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v8i3.12820.

Hadjon, Philipus M. Pengantar Hukum Administrasi Indonesia : Introduction to the Indonesian Administrative Law. Yogyakarta: UGM Press, 2019.

Hafizah, Hildayastie, dan Surastini Fitriasih. “Urgensi Penyelesaian Dugaan Kesalahan Medis Melalui Restorative Justice.” Jurnal USM Law Review 5, no. 1 (2022): 205–23. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v5i1.4304.

Harahap, M Yahya. Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2016.

Herman, Handrawan, Sabrina Hidayat, Oheo Kaimuddin Haris, Jabalnur, dan Sumber Jaya T. “Penolakan Putusan Praperadilan oleh Penuntut Umum.” Halu Oleo Legal Research 4, no. 2 (2022): 202–18. https://doi.org/10.33772/holresch.v4i2.

Hiariej, Eddy O S. “Prinsip-Prinsip Hukum Pidana.” Depok: Rajawali Pers, 2024.

Himpede, Ninni Feiny, Herlyanty Y A Bawole, dan Marchel R Maramis. “Kajian Hukum Kewenangan Penuntut Umum dalam Proses Praperadilan di Indonesia.” Lex Privatum 16, no. 1 (2025). https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id.

Huda, Ni’matul. Hukum Tata Negara Indonesia. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers, 2020.

Irwan, Rahmatiah. “Right to Be Forgotten for Child Victims of Electronic Sexual Violence.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 11, no. 1 (2026): 66–67. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v10i3.12784.

Irwan, Rahmatiah, Aulya Nisa’, Anggun Retno Wardani, Agrita Permata Sari, Azzura Fathanul Umara, dan Rivana Tesalonika Taroreh. “Right to Be Forgotten for Child Victims of Electronic Sexual Violence.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 11, no. 1 (2025): 66–86. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v11i1.12784.

Jzani, M. Rafsan. “The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice in Resolving Criminal Acts: Interaction Between Ocu Customary Law and Positive Law.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 10, no. 3 (2025): 394–414. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v10i3.12234.

Karjono, Arpandi, Parningotan Malau, dan Ciptono. “Penerapan Keadilan Restoratif Justice Dalam Hukum Pidana Berbasis Kearifan Lokal.” USM Law Review 7, no. 2 (2024): 1035–50. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v7i2.9571.

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) No. 8 Tahun 1981 (n.d.).

Melvando, Yanu Romansyah, Milda Istiqomah, dan Yuliati Yuliati. “Criminal Sanctions as a Consequence of Negligence by Data Controllers In Personal Data Breaches.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 10, no. 3 (2025): 363–75. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v10i3.12078.

Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Penemuan Hukum. Yogyakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka, 2019.

Mulyadi, Lilik. Hukum Acara Pidana: Suatu Tinjauan Khusus terhadap Surat Dakwaan, Eksepsi, dan Putusan Peradilan. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2017.

Nisa, Aprilia Khoirun, dan Ali Maskur. “Judicial Application of Actus Reus and Mens Rea In Village Fund Corruption Cases.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 11, no. 1 (2025): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v11i1.12996.

Nuraeni, Yeni, L Alfies Sihombing, dan Komarudin Komarudin. “Restorative Justice as a Solution to the Press Crisis: The Urgency of Reform in the Indonesian Justice System.” USM Law Review 8, no. 1 (2025): 412–27. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v8i1.12591.

Peraturan Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 tentang Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif (n.d.).

Pratiwi, Mg. Nela Violina Indah, dan Emmilia Rusdiana. Comparing the Transfer of Prisoners Between Japan and the Netherlands. Jurnal Ius Constituendum. Vol. 11, 2025. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v11i1.13000.

Rosita, Dian. “Kedudukan Kejaksaan sebagai Pelaksana Kekuasaan Negara di Bidang Penuntutan dalam Struktur Ketatanegaraan Indonesia.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 3, no. 1 (2018): 27–47. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v3i1.862.

Rosnida, Muhamad Aksan Akbar, Muhammad As Ari. AM, Irabiah Irabiah, Yeni Haerani, dan Patma Sari. “Legal Protection of Health Workers in Emergency Medical Procedures: An Analysis of Legal Certainty in Indonesia and Thailand.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 11, no. 1 (2025): 87–105. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v11i1.12818.

Sudarto. Hukum dan Hukum Pidana. Bandung: Alumni, 2007.

Susilo, Erwin, dan Dharma Setiawan Negara. “Critiquing the Use of the Term Restorative Justice in Narcotics Cases.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 10, no. 3 (2025): 376–93. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v10i3.12150.

Umam, Khaerul, Alwan Hadiyanto, dan Wijayono Hadi Sukrisno. “Pertimbangan Putusan Hakim Pra Peradilan Mengenai Sah Tidaknya Penetapan Tersangka.” Journal Juridisch 3, no. 2 (2025): 169–84. https://doi.org/10.26623/jj.v3i2.12865.

Wahid, Abdul. “Keadilan Restoratif: Upaya Menemukan Keadilan Substantif.” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 7, no. 1 (2022): 307–21. https://doi.org/10.36841/fenomena.v21i1.2910.