Effectiveness Of Legal Protection For Victims Of Mistake Arrest In Criminal Trial Process

Abstract

This study aims to describe and analyze effective legal protection for victims of wrongful arrest in the criminal justice process and to describe and analyze the weaknesses of effective legal protection for victims of wrongful arrest in the criminal justice process and its solutions also to describe and analyze the effectiveness of legal protection for victims of wrongful arrest in the criminal justice process. This study uses a sociological juridical method with analytical descriptive specifications. Primary data were obtained directly through interviews and analyzed using legal theory. The results of this study are that legal protection for victims of wrongful arrest in the criminal justice process is regulated in Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning Criminal Procedure Law. This protection is reflected in Article 95 and Article 97 of the Criminal Procedure Code which regulates the compensation and rehabilitation mechanisms, which are also clarified by Government Regulation Number 27 of 1983 and Decree of the Minister of Finance Number 983/KMK.01/1983. The investigator's responsibility is regulated in Law Number 2 of 2002, while the consequences of intent or negligence are listed in Articles 333, 334, and 335 of the Criminal Code. Protection for witnesses and victims is regulated in Law Number 13 of 2006. Weaknesses in legal protection for victims of wrongful arrest in the criminal justice process include, ineffective compensation and rehabilitation mechanisms, limited budget and resources, lack of awareness of law enforcement officers, lack of empathy in handling cases of wrongful arrest, a less than optimal rehabilitation process, and a careless investigation system. And the effectiveness of legal protection for victims of mistaken arrest in the criminal justice process in the future includes, regulatory reform for legal certainty, increasing the capacity of law enforcement officers, strengthening the supervision mechanism, simplifying the compensation process, enforcing the principles of justice and legal effectiveness, periodic evaluation of the justice system and cooperation between institutions.