The Legal Position of Investigators under Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article examines the legal position of investigators under Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code. The statute redefines investigation as a structured evidentiary process and places investigators as key actors who determine whether a reported event may proceed to prosecution. Using normative legal research, this study analyzes provisions on investigator classification, evidentiary authority, suspect determination, coercive measures, restorative justice, digital evidence, legal assistance, and pretrial review. The analysis shows that Articles 1, 6, 7, 89, 90, 142, 158, and 163 construct investigators as authoritative but reviewable procedural actors. Their authority covers evidence collection, rights affecting measures, settlement facilitation, and coordination with prosecutors. However, such authority is limited by due process, proportionality, documentation, judicial control, victim protection, and suspect rights. The new KUHAP therefore positions investigators as legal gatekeepers of legality, fairness, and accountability within Indonesian criminal justice.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Anggraeniko, L. S., Ambarwati, A., & Utami, F. R. (2026). Admissibility of digital evidence in Indonesia: Criminal–civil implications for the chain of custody and evidentiary validity. Priviet Social Sciences Journal, 6(4), 483–494. https://doi.org/10.55942/pssj.v6i4.1566
Antari, P. E. D., & Valensia Angel Yoshe Situmorang. (2024). Efektivitas Penerapan Electronic Traffic Law Enforcement (E-TLE) dalam Penegakan Aturan Lalu Lintas di Kota Denpasar. Jurnal Hukum To-Ra : Hukum Untuk Mengatur Dan Melindungi Masyarakat, 10(2), 310–326. https://doi.org/10.55809/tora.v10i2.357
Bhatti, N. (2026). The Use of Digital Evidence in Criminal Proceedings. American Journal of Society and Law, 5(1), 10–19. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajsl.v5i1.7211
Dehaghani, R. (2022). Interpreting and Reframing the Appropriate Adult Safeguard. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 42(1), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqab029
Fahrurazzi, F. (2026). Legal protection of suspects’ rights during the investigation stage viewed from the principle of due process of law in the Indonesian criminal justice system. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 3(1).
Firmansyah, S. H., & Farid, A. M. (2022). Politik Hukum Praperadilan sebagai Lembaga Perlindungan Hak Tersangka dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 mengenai Penetapan Tersangka. Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Dan Keadilan, 3(2), 90–103.
Gao, Z., Jian, Z., & Mousavirad, S. J. (2025). Reinforcement learning-driven feature selection enhanced by an evolutionary approach tuning for criminal suspect identification. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 41879. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-25920-6
Holder, R. L., & Dearing, A. (2023). Human Dignity, Rights and Victim Participacion in Criminal Justice. International Criminology, 4(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43576 024 00119 3
Jang, M. (2024). Exploring the quantity and type of evidence collected during criminal investigations in South Korea. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 9, 100544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100544
Jones, H., & Brookman, F. (2024). Risky calls: understanding the challenges and risks of using mobile phone data during homicide investigations. Policing and Society, 34(10), 1091–1107. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2024.2366311
Kadir, Z. K. (2026a). Narrative Closure in Honor killing Cases: How Judgments Stabilise Meaning, Eliminate Ambiguity, and Produce Sentencing Certainty. Punggawa Law Review, 1(1), 1–10.
Kadir, Z. K. (2026b). Neurocriminology and the Next Generation of Criminological Theory: Integration, Limits, and Ethical Risks. Punggawa Global Research: Jurnal Multidisiplin, 1(1), 1–8.
Kadir, Z. K., & Mappaselleng, N. F. (2025). Reformasi Konsep Heat of Passion: Menuju Pembatasan Provokasi dalam Mengurangi Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Pembunuhan. Justitiable-Jurnal Hukum, 8(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.56071/justitiable.v8i1.1293
Kadir, Z. K., Mappaselleng, N. F., & Kadir, N. K. (2026). Narasi Kehormatan (Siri’) dalam Perkara Pembunuhan terhadap Perempuan di Sulawesi Selatan. Jurnal Penelitian Serambi Hukum, 19(1), 387–398.
Kurdi, A., & Dadek, T. A. (2026). Transformasi penegakan due process of law dalam tahapan penyidikan di Indonesia. Legal Standing Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 10(1).
Lee, C. O. (2024). Research of legislative direction on the suspect statement evidence. Contemporary Review of Criminal Law, 84, 77–84.
Lee, J., & Choi, Y. (2025). Decriminalization of adultery likely changed women’s views on divorce following spousal infidelity in South Korea. Demographic Research, 52, 111–124. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2025.52.4
Matijašević, J., Bingulac, N., & Marinković, D. (2024). Digital evidence in criminal proceedings: Challenges and solutions. Pravo - Teorija i Praksa, 41(4), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.5937/ptp2404018M
Matijević, M. (2024). Indicative evidence – proof by indications. Zbornik Radova Centra Za Edukaciju Sudija i Tužilaca RS.
Nash, C., Dioso-Villa, R., & Porter, L. (2024). Factors Contributing to Guilty Plea Wrongful Convictions: A Quantitative Analysis of Australian Appellate Court Judgments. Crime & Delinquency, 70(2), 441–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287211054723
R, A. C., & Dehaghani, R. (2024). Navigating the Right to a Fair Trial for Vulnerable Suspects Pretrial: A Legal and Psychological Critique of the Strasbourg Jurisprudence. Human Rights Law Review, 25(2), 1–23.
Sachoulidou, A. (2024). Cross-border access to electronic evidence in criminal matters: The new EU legislation and the consolidation of a paradigm shift in the area of ‘judicial’ cooperation. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 15(3), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844241258649
Saragih, M. B. M. D. (2024). Kewajiban Penyidik Menghentikan Proses Penyidikan Berdasarkan Putusan Praperadilan Tentang Penetapan Tersangka Yang Tidak Sah dan Tidak Berkekuatan Hukum. Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum, 4(1), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.56128/jkih.v4i1.307
Stoykova, R., Andersen, S., Franke, K., & Axelsson, S. (2022). Reliability assessment of digital forensic investigations in the Norwegian police. Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation, 40, 301351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsidi.2022.301351