Epistemological Mistakes in Determining Suspects Based on the Concept of Trichotomy Relationships
Abstract
The National Police Investigator of the Republic of Indonesia, based on Article 7 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, has the authority to determine someone as a suspect for a criminal offense. The implementation of this authority is not absolutely; however, there are several restrictions and parameters, as established both through the Criminal Procedure Code or through the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 21/PUU-XII/2014 dated April 28, 2015. Moreover, restrictions and parameters require an interpretive-cognitive touch from the investigator itself. Thus, there is often a mistake in epistemology or mistaken knowledge in issuing and issuing a decision to determine someone as a suspect. Therefore, the suspect still occupies the Binary Inferior (The Other) opposition in the process of criminal justice practices in Indonesia. This research tries to question the wrong epistemological model in determining the suspect in the realm of investigation. The research methods used are legal methods with the Trichotomy Relationships approach, Communication Speech Acts approach, and Critical Discourse Analysis approach. The results of this study show that there is a state of superior binary opposition (the central) from the investigator to decide by ignoring the legal rights of someone who was used as a suspect.
Keywords: determination of the suspect, investigator, mistaken epistemology, trichotomy relationships
References
[1] Wibowo W. Konsep Tindak Tutur Komunikasi. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara; 2016.
[2] Prakoso A. Hukum, Filsafat Logika dan Argumentasi Hukum. Surabaya: LaksBang Justitia; 2015.
[3] Littlejohn SW, Foss KA. Ensiklopedia Teori Komunikasi. Jakarta: Kencana; 2016.
[4] Adlin A. “Michel Foucault: Kuasa/Pengetahuan, (Rezim) Kebenaran, Parrhesia,” JAQFI urnal Aqidah dan Filsafat Islam, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13–26, 2016, doi: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15575/jaqfi.v1i1.1694.
[5] Effendy OU. Ilmu Komunikasi : Teori dan Praktek. Bandung: Remaja Rosda Karya; 2004.
[6] Fitriati F, Kurnia ML, Oktoriny F. Aplikasi Komunikasi Hukum Sebagai Usaha Penegakan Hukum Di Daerah Marjinal. Masal. Huk. 2014;43(4):560–7.
[7] Widodo A. Model Komunikasi Pemeriksaan Dalam Sidang Agenda Pembuktian Perkara di Pengadilan. J. Komun. 2020;12(2):157–75.
[8] Rozah U. Problematika Penerapan Logika Positivistik Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana Terhadap Tuntutan Keadilan Substantif. Masal. Huk. 2014;43(1):140–8.
[9] Hiariej EO. “Asas Dan Prinsip Hukum Pidana Di Masa Pandemi,” in Perkembangan Asas, Teori Serta Praktik Hukum Pidana Dan Kriminologi Di Masa Pandemi Covid-19, 2022, pp. 1–10.
[10] Kartika IG, et al. Penalaran dan Argumentasi Hukum. Denpasar: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Udayana; 2016.
[11] Soekanto S. Faktor-faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Penegakkan Hukum. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada; 2014.
[12] Soekanto S. Penegakan Hukum. Jakarta: Binacipta; 1983.
[13] Julyano M, Sulistyawan AY. Pemahaman Terhadap Asas Kepastian Hukum Melalui Konstruksi Penalaran Positivisme Hukum. Crepido. 2019;1(1):13–22.
[14] Gundoğan E. Conceptions of Hegemony in Antonio Gramsci’s Southern Question and the Prison Notebooks. New Propos. J. Marx. Interdiscip. Inq. 2008;2(1):45–60.
[15] Foucault M. The Courage of the Truth (The Government of Self and Other II) Lectures at the College de France 1983-1984. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2011.
[16] Wasesa SA. “Relasi Kuasa dalam Novel Entrok Karya Okky Madasari,” Fakultas Bahasa dan Seni Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, 2013.
[17] Pontier JA. Rechtsvinding (Penemuan Hukum). Jakarta: Jendela Mas Pustaka; 2008.
[18] Mailasari DU. Pengaruh Ideologi Dalam Penafsiran. J. Hermeneut. 2013;7(1):53–68.
[19] Bahran, “Penetapan Tersangka Menurut Hukum Acara Pidana Dalam Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia,” Syariah J. Ilmu Huk. dan Pemikir., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 220–239, 2017, https://doi.org/10.18592/sy.v17i2.1972..
[20] Putra PS. “The Antinomy of Value in Determining a Suspect by a Judge: An Anachronism in the History of Human Rights,” in International Conference on Education, Humanities, Health and Agriculture, 2021, no. 21, pp. 1–7.
[21] Ibrahim J. Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian. Jakarta: Bayumedia Publishing; 2012.
[22] Marbun R, Oedoyo W, Sinaga DM. Logika Monolog Dalam Trikotomi Relasi Pada Proses Pra-Adjudikasi. J. USM Law Rev. 2021;4(1):1–26.
[23] Marbun R. “Komunikasi Instrumental Berbasis Trikotomi Relasi: Kewenangan Interpretasi Penyidik Dalam Menetapkan Seseorang Sebagai Tersangka,” J. Huk. pidana kriminologi, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 20–33, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.51370/jhpk.v2i1.10..
[24] Marbun R. Trikotomi Relasi dalam Penetapan Tersangka : Menguji Frasa ‘Pemeriksaan Calon Tersangka’ Melalui Praperadilan. Undang J. Huk. 2021;4(1):159–90.
[25] Marbun R. “Symbolic Domination in the Regulation of the Supreme Court Number 4 of 2016 Concerning the Prohibition of Reviewing Pre-Trial Decisions,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Law Reform (INCLAR 2021), 2021, vol. 590, pp. 57–62.
[26] Syahputra A, Marbun R. “Double Standards of Law Enforcement in the Covid- 19 Pandemic Era in Indonesia : A Relationship Trichotomy Study,” in the 2nd International Conference on Law Reform (INCLAR), 2021, vol. 590, no. 2, pp. 51– 56.
[27] Marbun R. “Trichotomy of Relation Through Instrumental Communication in Pre-Adjudication Stage: The Failure of Criminal Procedure Code to Foster Law Enforcement Attitudes,” in the 1st International Conference on Education, Humanities, Health and Agriculture, 2021, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.3-6- 2021.2310893.
[28] Sunggara MA, Marbun R. “The Logic of the Public Prosecutor’s Monologue in Legal Interpretation: Tracing the Fallacy of the Public Prosecutor’s Indictment in the Crime of Corruption in …,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Law Reform (INCLAR 2021) The, 2021, vol. 590, no. Inclar, pp. 39–44.
[29] Tongat, Hukum Pidana Materiil (Edisi Revisi). Malang: UMM Press; 2002.
[30] Muliyono A, Marbun R. “Symbolic Dominance in the Criminal Law Enforcement Indonesia : Convergence Between the Trinity of Power and Truth-Games,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Law Reform (INCLAR 2021) Symbolic. 2021;590: 45–50.