Pasal 109 ayat (1) KUHAP menyatakan “dalam hal penyidik telah memulai melakukan penyidikan suatu peristiwa yang merupakan tindak pidana, penyidik memberitahukan hal itu kepada penuntut umum”. Dalam penjelasan pasal ini tidak ditentukan jangka waktu yang pasti kapan Surat Pemberitahuan Dimulainya Penyidikan (SPDP) harus diserahkan penyidik kepada Jaksa. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Putusannya No.130/PUU-XIII/2015 tanggal 11 Januari 2017 menyatakan Pasal 109 ayat (1) KUHAP bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia tahun 1945 serta tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat apabila frasa “penyidik memberitahukan hal itu kepada penuntut umum” tidak dimaknai penyidik wajib memberitahukan dan menyerahkan SPDP kepada penuntut umum, terlapor dan korban dalam waktu paling lambat tujuh hari setelah dikeluarkan surat perintah penyidikan. Tujuan penulisan ini untuk mengetahui implementasi Putusan MK No.130/PUU-XIII/2015 tanggal 11 Januari 2017 terkait SPDP pada Wilayah Hukum Pengadilan Negeri Banda Aceh. Metode yang digunakan yaitu pendekatan penelitian hukum yuridis empiris dan yuridis normatif, dengan lokasi penelitian pada Kejaksaan Tinggi Aceh dan Kejaksaan Negeri Banda Aceh. Sumber data adalah data primer yang diperoleh dari penelitian lapangan dengan cara wawancara, serta data skunder dengan melakukan penelitian kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan awal implementasinya sering ditemukan penyerahan SPDP yang melebihi waktu tujuh hari sejak diterbitkannya surat perintah penyidikan. Setelah setahun berjalan, penyerahan SPDP melebihi waktu tujuh hari masih ada, tetapi sedikit jumlahnya, bukan karena penyidik telah sepenuhnya menerapkan putusan MK tersebut, akan tetapi selain untuk melaksanakan penegakan hukum, juga untuk menghindari praperadilan yang bisa saja dimohonkan terlapor dan korban.Article 109 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code stated that “in term of the investigator has started the investigation of the case which is a criminal act, the investigator notifies the public prosecutor about it”. In the explanation of this article, there is no definite period of time when the Notification Letter of Commencement of investigation must be submitted by the investigator to the prosecutor. The Constitutional Court in its decision No. 130/PUU-XIII/2015 of January 11, 2017 stated that Article 109 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and does not have binding legal force if the phrase “the Investigator notifies the public prosecutor about it” it is not meant that the investigator is obliged to notify and submit SPDP to the public prosecutor, the reported person and the victim no later than seven days after the investigation warrant was issued. The purpose of this study is to understand about the implementation of Constitutional Court Decision No. 130/PUU-XIII/2015 of January 11, 2017 regarding the SPDP in legal jurisdiction of Banda Aceh District Court. The purpose of this study is to understand about the implementation of Constitutional Court Decision No. 130/PUU-XIII/2015 of January 11, 2017 regarding the SPDP in legal jurisdiction of Banda Aceh District Court. The method used in this research is empirical juridical and normative juridical legal research approach, with the research location at Aceh High Prosecutor's Office and Banda Aceh District Attorney’s office. The sources of data are primary data that is obtained through field research by conducting the interviews and secondary data that is obtained by conducting library research. The results of this study shows that in the initial implementation, it is often found that the submission of the SPDP is more than seven days after the issuance of the investigation warrant. After a year of its implementation, the submission of the SPDP over a seven days period still exists, but few in number, it is not because the investigators have fully implemented the Constitutional Court Decision, however in addition to implementing law enforcement, it is also to avoid pretrial that may be filed by the reported person and victim.
Implementation of Extraordinary Review (Pk) For the Public Prosecutors after the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 33/Puu-Xiv/2016
