Analisis Yuridis terhadap Perintangan Penyidikan (Obstruction of Justice) Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia (Studi Putusan Nomor 24/Pid.Sus-TPK/2023/PN Kdi dan Putusan Nomor 1/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PT KDI)

Abstract

Corruption constitutes a severe threat to economic stability and democracy in Indonesia. In combating this crime, obstacles frequently emerge in the form of obstruction of justice, perpetrated by various parties attempting to thwart legal proceedings. This research examines three primary issues. First, how obstruction of justice (the crime of obstructing investigations) is regulated within Indonesia's positive criminal law. Second, how criminal liability is imposed upon individuals who obstruct the investigation process according to Law Number 31 of 1999 and Law Number 20 of 2001. Third, how judicial considerations operate in deciding obstruction of justice cases in Decision Number 24/Pid.Sus-TPK/2023/PN Kdi and Decision Number 1/PID.SUS-TPK/2024/PT KDI. This study employs a normative juridical method with statutory and case approaches. Secondary data comprising primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials were collected through library research and analyzed qualitatively. The findings reveal that obstruction of justice regulations are dispersed across various legislations with varying degrees of clarity. The old Criminal Code remains limited and insufficiently specific, whereas the 2023 Criminal Code provides more systematic formulations through Chapter VI on Crimes Against the Judicial Process. The Anti-Corruption Law specifically regulates obstruction in Article 21 with heavier sanctions. Criminal liability is founded upon individual responsibility principles with elements that must be cumulatively fulfilled, encompassing the legal subject of "every person", the element of intent, and acts of preventing, obstructing, or thwarting the investigation process. Analysis of court decisions demonstrates that judicial panels interpret the element of "obstruction" broadly, although room exists for debate regarding causal relationships and the interpretation of intent within the context of protecting suspects' constitutional rights. This research recommends the necessity for regulatory harmonization, strengthening law enforcement capacity, and enhancing public awareness to reinforce the effectiveness of law enforcement against obstruction of justice in corruption cases.