Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research is based on the issue of limited access to legal assistance for suspects or defendants in the Indonesian criminal justice system. The provisions in Article 155 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the New Criminal Procedure Code remain stipulating a minimum criminal penalty and various administrative requirements for obtaining free legal assistance. These provisions pose the potential to hinder suspects or defendants, especially those who are incapacitated or detained, from obtaining effective legal assistance. Consequently, there is an imbalance in the position between the state and individuals in criminal justice, which can affect the search for material truth ( veritas ) as the main objective of criminal procedure law. This research aims to analyse the role of advocates in assisting to uncover veritas in criminal justice and formulate a more effective regulatory concept for legal assistance. The study uses a doctrinal legal research method with a conceptual approach and a statutory approach, which is analysed qualitatively against legal norms governing legal assistance. The results indicate that the presence of advocates plays an important role in balancing the relationship between the state and suspects or defendants and strengthening the fair evidentiary process. Therefore, this research recommends the reconstruction of legal assistance regulations by removing the minimum criminal penalty limit in Article 155 of the New Criminal Procedure Code and simplifying the administrative requirements for detained suspects or defendants. This reformulation is necessary to ensure that legal assistance truly functions as an instrument to guarantee equality before the law and support the search for material truth in criminal justice.
Keywords
Article Details
Copyright (c) 2026 Erwin Susilo, Muhammad Rafi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
References
Abidin, Zainal, Wagiman, Wahyudi Djafar, Syahrial M. Wiryawan, Riesta Aldila Benanda, Muhamad Eka Ari Pramuditya, Erasmus A. T. Napitupulu, and Adhigama A. Budiman. Menyelisik Keadilan Yang Rentan : Hukuman Mati Dan Penerapan Fair Trial Di Indonesia. Edited by Fathan Qorib and Anggara. Jakarta Selatan: Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, 2019.
Afandi, Fachrizal. “Implementasi Pengabdian Masyarakat Berbasis Access to Justice Pada Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Kampus Negeri Pasca Pemberlakuan Undang-Undang Bantuan Hukum.” Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional 2, no. 1 (2013): 31–45. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v2i1.80.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v2i1.80Afifah, Wiwik. “Bantuan Hukum Kelompok Rentan.” DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 16, no. 1 (2020): 123–38. https://doi.org/10.30996/dih.v16i1.3045.
Angga, Angga, and Ridwan Arifin. “Penerapan Bantuan Hukum Bagi Masyarakat Kurang Mampu Di Indonesia.” DIVERSI : Jurnal Hukum 4, no. 2 (2019): 218–36. https://doi.org/10.32503/diversi.v4i2.374.
Asra Rahmad, Riadi. Hukum Acara Pidana. Depok: Rajawali Pers, 2019.
Budijanto, Oki Wahju. “Peningkatan Akses Bantuan Hukum Kepada Masyarakat Miskin.” Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 16, no. 4 (2016): 463–75.
Budzinski, Andrew C. “Reforming Service of Process: An Access-to-Justice Framework.” U. Colo. L. Rev 90, no. 1 (2019): 167–223.
Codices. “Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil,” 1988. https://codices.coe.int/codices/documents/constitution/FAD0640C-B8CA-453E-AA11-5E514BC898D1?lang=eng.
Constituteproject.org. “Japan’s Constitution of 1946,” 1946. https://www.rightofassembly.info/assets/downloads/1946_Constitution_of_Japan_(as_amended)_(English_translation).pdf.
Crema, Max, and Lawrence B Solum. “The Original Meaning of ‘Due Process of Law’ in the Fifth Amendment.” Virginia Law Review 108, no. 2 (2022): 447–535.
Donnelly, Jack. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. New York: Cornell University, 2013.
Gayo, Ahyar Ari. “Optimalisasi Pelayanan Bantuan Hukum Bagi Masyarakat Miskin.” Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 20, no. 3 (2020): 409–34. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2020.v20.409-434.
Gordon, Robert W. “Lawyers, the Legal Profession & Access to Justice in the United States: A Brief History.” Daedalus 148, no. 1 (2019): 177–89. https://doi.org/https:/doi:10.1162/DAED_a_00551.
Kanovitz, Jacqueline R., Jefferson L. Ingram, and Christopher J. Devine. Constitutional Law for Criminal Justice. New York: Routledge, 2024.
Kupryashina, Elena A., Dmitry V. Boev, Anna A. Gileva, Anzhelika I. Lyakhova, and Sergey F. Shumilin. “The Right to Receive Legal Assistance in Criminal Proceedings in Russia and in Foreign Countries.” Linguistics and Culture Review 5, no. S3 (2021): 992–1000. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS3.1689.
Lin, Yu Hsiung, Shih Fan Wang, Chung Yen Chen, Tsai Chen Tsai, and Chiou Ming Tsai. “The Potential to Secure a Fair Trial Through Evidence Exclusion: A Taiwanese Perspective.” In Ius Gentium, 74:131–61, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12520-2_5.
Lochs, M, and SE Iqbal. “Tegenspraak in Strafzaken: Essentieel Oor de Waarheids Inding in Het Contradictoire Proces?” Rechtsgeleerd Magazijn THEMIS 184, no. 2 (2023): 96–108.
Mentovich, Avital, J. J. Prescott, and Orna Rabinovich-Einy. “Legitimacy and Online Proceedings: Procedural Justice, Access to Justice, and the Role of Income.” Law and Society Review 57, no. 2 (2023): 189–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12653.
Metzger, Pamela R., and Janet C. Hoeffel. “Criminal (Dis)Appearance.” George Washington Law Review, 2020.
Palombella, Gianluigi. “Access to Justice: Dynamic, Foundational, and Generative.” Ratio Juris 34, no. 2 (2021): 121–38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/raju.12309.
Perezhniak, Boris, Dariia Balobanova, Liliia Timofieieva, Olena Tavlui, and Yuliia Poliuk. “The Right to a Fair Trial: Conceptual Rethinking in an Era of Quarantine Restrictions.” Revista Amazonia Investiga 10, no. 38 (2021): 168–77. https://doi.org/10.34069/ai/2021.38.02.16.
Petersen, Ericka. “Building a House for Gideon: The Right to Counsel in Evictions.” Stanford Journal of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties 16, no. 1 (2020): 63–112.
Ramos, Vânia Costa. “The EPPO and the Equality of Arms between the Prosecutor and the Defence1.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 14, no. 1 (2023): 43–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844231157078.
Rudzkis, Tomas, and Art Panomariovas. “Aspiration of the Criminal Procedure the Truth.” Jurisprudencija 18, no. 2 (2011): 739–54.
Schmitz, Amy J. “Measuring ‘Access to Justice’ in the Rush to Digitize.” Fordham Law Review 88, no. 6 (2020): 2381–2406.
Smith, Russell, and Rebecca Savage. “Audiovisual Link Technologies in Australian Criminal Courts: Practical and Legal Considerations.” AIC Reports Research Report 22. Canberra, 2021. https://doi.org/10.52922/rr78184.
Stubbs, Jonathan K. “The Ripple Effects of Gideon: Recognizing the Human Right to Legal Counsel in Civil Adversarial Proceedings.” Stetson L. Rev 49 (2020): 457–98.
Sumarsih. “Peran Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Mewujudkan Access to Justice.” Muhammadiyah Law Review 6, no. 1 (2022): 19–27. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.24127/lr.v6i1.1843.
Taekema, Sanne, and Wibren van der Burg. “Legal Philosophy as an Enrichment of Doctrinal Research – Part II: The Purposes of Including Legal Philosophy.” Law and Method, 2022, 1–19. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5553/rem/.000065.
Vanderveen, Gabry. “Remote Justice: A Visual Essay on the Response of the Dutch Justice System to the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Visual Studies 38, no. 3–4 (2023): 616–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2022.2050941.
Yang, Crystal S., and Will Dobbie. “Equal Protection Under Algorithms: A New Statistical and Legal Framework.” Michigan Law Review 119, no. 2 (2020): 291–396. https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.119.2.equal.
References
Abidin, Zainal, Wagiman, Wahyudi Djafar, Syahrial M. Wiryawan, Riesta Aldila Benanda, Muhamad Eka Ari Pramuditya, Erasmus A. T. Napitupulu, and Adhigama A. Budiman. Menyelisik Keadilan Yang Rentan : Hukuman Mati Dan Penerapan Fair Trial Di Indonesia. Edited by Fathan Qorib and Anggara. Jakarta Selatan: Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, 2019.
Afandi, Fachrizal. “Implementasi Pengabdian Masyarakat Berbasis Access to Justice Pada Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Kampus Negeri Pasca Pemberlakuan Undang-Undang Bantuan Hukum.” Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional 2, no. 1 (2013): 31–45. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v2i1.80.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v2i1.80Afifah, Wiwik. “Bantuan Hukum Kelompok Rentan.” DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 16, no. 1 (2020): 123–38. https://doi.org/10.30996/dih.v16i1.3045.
Angga, Angga, and Ridwan Arifin. “Penerapan Bantuan Hukum Bagi Masyarakat Kurang Mampu Di Indonesia.” DIVERSI : Jurnal Hukum 4, no. 2 (2019): 218–36. https://doi.org/10.32503/diversi.v4i2.374.
Asra Rahmad, Riadi. Hukum Acara Pidana. Depok: Rajawali Pers, 2019.
Budijanto, Oki Wahju. “Peningkatan Akses Bantuan Hukum Kepada Masyarakat Miskin.” Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 16, no. 4 (2016): 463–75.
Budzinski, Andrew C. “Reforming Service of Process: An Access-to-Justice Framework.” U. Colo. L. Rev 90, no. 1 (2019): 167–223.
Codices. “Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil,” 1988. https://codices.coe.int/codices/documents/constitution/FAD0640C-B8CA-453E-AA11-5E514BC898D1?lang=eng.
Constituteproject.org. “Japan’s Constitution of 1946,” 1946. https://www.rightofassembly.info/assets/downloads/1946_Constitution_of_Japan_(as_amended)_(English_translation).pdf.
Crema, Max, and Lawrence B Solum. “The Original Meaning of ‘Due Process of Law’ in the Fifth Amendment.” Virginia Law Review 108, no. 2 (2022): 447–535.
Donnelly, Jack. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. New York: Cornell University, 2013.
Gayo, Ahyar Ari. “Optimalisasi Pelayanan Bantuan Hukum Bagi Masyarakat Miskin.” Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 20, no. 3 (2020): 409–34. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2020.v20.409-434.
Gordon, Robert W. “Lawyers, the Legal Profession & Access to Justice in the United States: A Brief History.” Daedalus 148, no. 1 (2019): 177–89. https://doi.org/https:/doi:10.1162/DAED_a_00551.
Kanovitz, Jacqueline R., Jefferson L. Ingram, and Christopher J. Devine. Constitutional Law for Criminal Justice. New York: Routledge, 2024.
Kupryashina, Elena A., Dmitry V. Boev, Anna A. Gileva, Anzhelika I. Lyakhova, and Sergey F. Shumilin. “The Right to Receive Legal Assistance in Criminal Proceedings in Russia and in Foreign Countries.” Linguistics and Culture Review 5, no. S3 (2021): 992–1000. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS3.1689.
Lin, Yu Hsiung, Shih Fan Wang, Chung Yen Chen, Tsai Chen Tsai, and Chiou Ming Tsai. “The Potential to Secure a Fair Trial Through Evidence Exclusion: A Taiwanese Perspective.” In Ius Gentium, 74:131–61, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12520-2_5.
Lochs, M, and SE Iqbal. “Tegenspraak in Strafzaken: Essentieel Oor de Waarheids Inding in Het Contradictoire Proces?” Rechtsgeleerd Magazijn THEMIS 184, no. 2 (2023): 96–108.
Mentovich, Avital, J. J. Prescott, and Orna Rabinovich-Einy. “Legitimacy and Online Proceedings: Procedural Justice, Access to Justice, and the Role of Income.” Law and Society Review 57, no. 2 (2023): 189–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12653.
Metzger, Pamela R., and Janet C. Hoeffel. “Criminal (Dis)Appearance.” George Washington Law Review, 2020.
Palombella, Gianluigi. “Access to Justice: Dynamic, Foundational, and Generative.” Ratio Juris 34, no. 2 (2021): 121–38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/raju.12309.
Perezhniak, Boris, Dariia Balobanova, Liliia Timofieieva, Olena Tavlui, and Yuliia Poliuk. “The Right to a Fair Trial: Conceptual Rethinking in an Era of Quarantine Restrictions.” Revista Amazonia Investiga 10, no. 38 (2021): 168–77. https://doi.org/10.34069/ai/2021.38.02.16.
Petersen, Ericka. “Building a House for Gideon: The Right to Counsel in Evictions.” Stanford Journal of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties 16, no. 1 (2020): 63–112.
Ramos, Vânia Costa. “The EPPO and the Equality of Arms between the Prosecutor and the Defence1.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 14, no. 1 (2023): 43–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844231157078.
Rudzkis, Tomas, and Art Panomariovas. “Aspiration of the Criminal Procedure the Truth.” Jurisprudencija 18, no. 2 (2011): 739–54.
Schmitz, Amy J. “Measuring ‘Access to Justice’ in the Rush to Digitize.” Fordham Law Review 88, no. 6 (2020): 2381–2406.
Smith, Russell, and Rebecca Savage. “Audiovisual Link Technologies in Australian Criminal Courts: Practical and Legal Considerations.” AIC Reports Research Report 22. Canberra, 2021. https://doi.org/10.52922/rr78184.
Stubbs, Jonathan K. “The Ripple Effects of Gideon: Recognizing the Human Right to Legal Counsel in Civil Adversarial Proceedings.” Stetson L. Rev 49 (2020): 457–98.
Sumarsih. “Peran Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Mewujudkan Access to Justice.” Muhammadiyah Law Review 6, no. 1 (2022): 19–27. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.24127/lr.v6i1.1843.
Taekema, Sanne, and Wibren van der Burg. “Legal Philosophy as an Enrichment of Doctrinal Research – Part II: The Purposes of Including Legal Philosophy.” Law and Method, 2022, 1–19. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5553/rem/.000065.
Vanderveen, Gabry. “Remote Justice: A Visual Essay on the Response of the Dutch Justice System to the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Visual Studies 38, no. 3–4 (2023): 616–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2022.2050941.
Yang, Crystal S., and Will Dobbie. “Equal Protection Under Algorithms: A New Statistical and Legal Framework.” Michigan Law Review 119, no. 2 (2020): 291–396. https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.119.2.equal.