Jakarta – The government has affirmed its readiness to provide comprehensive explanations regarding several crucial articles of the Criminal Code (KUHP) and the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) that are currently being challenged at the Constitutional Court (MK). The explanation will be presented academically by a team of experts to ensure a thorough understanding of the substance and philosophical foundations of the National Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Code.
Vice Minister of Law (Wamenkum) Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej stated that, to date, there have been 15 petitions filed against the KUHP concerning 14 key issues that have drawn public attention, as well as six petitions concerning the KUHAP. He noted that the government has anticipated constitutional challenges to the newly enacted KUHP and KUHAP from the outset.
“During the drafting of the KUHP, we had already anticipated that this would certainly be challenged, and we are ready to defend it from an academic standpoint,” he said while delivering the keynote address at the National KUHP Socialization event at Graha Pengayoman, Jakarta, on Monday (January 26 2026).
“Why were these provisions included, and why were they formulated in this manner? Our team of experts stands ready to provide clear explanations to the public regarding the issues currently under review at the Constitutional Court,” added Eddy.
Eddy further explained that one of the items challenged by petitioners at the Constitutional Court regarding the Code of Criminal Procedure (KUHAP) concerns the coordination between investigators and public prosecutors. He emphasized that this coordination was designed to clarify criminal events, ensure legal certainty, and minimize sectoral ego.
“Our shared task and challenge is to effectively explain to the public the vision and mission underlying the National KUHP, while also addressing the 14 key issues currently being challenged at the Constitutional Court,” he said.
He also addressed public perceptions that certain KUHP and KUHAP articles are open to multiple interpretations, particularly regarding the 14 key issues. According to him, no law can be entirely free from interpretation. Citing renowned legal scholar Prof. Satjipto Rahardjo, he noted that drafting legislation is one matter, while interpreting it is another.
“It is impossible for any law to be implemented without interpretation. There will inevitably be gaps, and it is our responsibility to explain them, to convey the legislative intent behind each article and how law enforcement officers should uphold that intent in its daily application,” he concluded.
