Status Quo Bias dalam Reformasi Hukum Acara Pidana di Indonesia: Kegagalan Penguatan Pengawasan Pengadilan (Judicial Scrutiny) yang Lebih Optimal

Authors

• Choky Risda Ramadhan, Universitas IndonesiaFollow
• Abni Nur Aini, Universitas Indonesia
• Dheliana Khairunisa, Universitas Indonesia

Abstract

Pretrial proceedings (Praperadilan), as a form of judicial scrutiny, function as a control mechanism over the actions of law enforcement officials to prevent abuses of power. This mechanism was introduced in the 1981 Criminal Procedure Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana, KUHAP) and re-regulated in the 2025 KUHAP. However, numerous studies and focus group discussion with legal scholars and law enforcement officers have documented structural weaknesses in Praperadilan, prompting calls to reform judicial scrutiny in order to more effectively limit law enforcement authority and protect the human rights of individuals involved in criminal proceedings. During the Reform era (2004–2025), proposals to establish a Commissioner Judge and later the Preliminary Examination Judge (Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan, HPP) emerged in the Draft Criminal Procedure Code (Rancangan KUHAP, RKUHAP) as mechanisms intended to strengthen judicial oversight and human rights protection. Despite these proposals, the provisions concerning the HPP ultimately failed to be enacted in the 2025 KUHAP. This article reviews criticisms regarding the limited judicial scrutiny provided by Praperadilan and examines how the narratives of key actors—the judiciary, lawyers, the government expert team, and parliament—, through media analysis of more than 100 news article, both promoted and rejected draft provisions granting courts broader authority to oversee investigations in order to protect human rights. The findings suggest that strong public, professional, and academic support was insufficient to overcome deeply rooted institutional and political resistance. This resistance can be understood through the concept of status quo bias, which explains the tendency of institutions to avoid change and maintain existing arrangements in criminal justice policymaking.

Bahasa Abstract

Praperadilan merupakan bentuk pengawasan pengadilan (judicial scrutiny), yang  berfungsi sebagai kontrol terhadap penyalahgunaan wewenang penegak hukum, sebagaimana pernah diatur dalam KUHAP 1981 dan diatur kembali dalam KUHAP 2025. Berbagai literatur dan diskusi kelompok terfokus bersama ahli dan praktisi telah mencatat beberapa kelemahan praperadilan sehingga terjadi upaya reformasi judicial scrutiny untuk lebih membatasi kewenangan penegak hukum dan melindungi hak asasi pihak yang berhadapan dengan hukum. Gagasan mengenai Hakim Komisaris dan kemudian menjadi Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan (HPP) diusulkan dalam Rancangan Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (RKUHAP) selama era Reformasi (2004-2025) sebagai bentuk judicial scrutiny yang memperkuat perlindungan hak asasi manusia. Akan tetapi, pengaturan mengenai HPP gagal dalam legislasi KUHAP 2025. Tulisan ini akan merangkum berbagai kritik lemahnya pengawasan melalui praperadilan. Kemudian akan dibahas juga  bagaimana narasi aktor terkait (Pengadilan, Advokat, Tim Ahli Pemerintah, dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat), melalui analisis terhadap 100 lebih pemberitaan pada kurun waktu 2002-2025. Para aktor ini bertujuan mendorong dan menghilangkan rumusan pasal yang memberi kewenangan pengadilan untuk memastikan penyidikan dan upaya hukum melindungi hak asasi manusia. Fenomena ini menunjukkan bahwa dukungan publik, praktisi dan akademisi yang besar ternyata tidak cukup kuat untuk menembus tembok resistensi kekuasaan baik secara institusional maupun politik yang telah mengakar. Pola penolakan ini dapat dipahami melalui lensa analisis perilaku, yaitu   status quo bias, yaitu kecenderungan  institusi kekuasaan  untuk menghindari perubahan dan mempertahankan kondisi dan pengaturan sistem peradilan pidana yang sedang berlaku.

References

Buku

Ali, Achmad. 2004. Sosiologi Hukum: Kajian Empiris terhadap Pengadilan. Jakarta: Penerbit STIH IBLAM.

BPHN (Badan Pembinaan Hukum Nasional). 2011. Hakim Komisaris dalam Sistem Peradilan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Badan Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, Kementerian Hukum dan HAM RI. Diakses 2 April 2025. https://bphn.go.id/data/documents/pk-2011-2.pdf.

Eddyono, Supriyadi Widodo, Wahyudi Djafar, Sufriyadi, Erasmus A. T. Napitupulu, dan Sriyana. 2014. Praperadilan di Indonesia: Teori, Sejarah, dan Praktiknya. Disunting oleh Anggara. Jakarta: Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR).

Harahap, M. Yahya. 2012. Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP: Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi, dan Peninjauan Kembali. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Jaholden. 2021. Pra-peradilan dan Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana. Pasuruan: CV. AA Rizky.

LBH Jakarta. 2022. Rapor Merah Kepolisian RI, Kewenangan Tanpa Pengawasan: Polisi Konsisten Jadi Aktor Pelanggar HAM. Jakarta: LBH Jakarta.

Lovina, dan Sustira Dirga. 2022. Judicial Scrutiny melalui Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan dalam RKUHAP. Jakarta: Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR).

Pangaribuan, Luhut M. P. 2014. Hukum Acara Pidana: Surat Resmi Advokat di Pengadilan. Depok Timur: Papas Sinar Sinanti.

Purba, Tunian L. D., dan Silvester M. L. Palit. 2025. Praperadilan dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia. Jakarta: CV. Luminary Press Indonesia.

Tak, Peter J. P. 2008. The Dutch Criminal Justice System. Edisi ke-3. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.

Trochim, William M., James P. Donnelly, dan Kanika Arora. 2022. Research Methods: The Essential Knowledge Base. Uttar Pradesh: Cengage.

Artikel Jurnal

Ababil, Renol, Saut Parulian Panjaitan, dan Ruben Achmad. 2024. "Pertimbangan Hukum Hakim dalam Putusan Perkara Praperadilan tentang Penetapan Tersangka." Lex Lata: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum 6 (1): 126–43. https://journal.fh.unsri.ac.id/index.php/LexS/article/view/3717/1147.

Adji, Indriyanto Seno. 2002. "Hakim Komisaris: Solusi Kearah Prinsip Keadilan." Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan 32 (3): 251–70.

Afandi, Fachrizal. 2016. "Perbandingan Praktik Praperadilan dan Pembentukan Hakim Pemeriksaan Pendahuluan dalam Peradilan Pidana Indonesia." Mimbar Hukum 28 (1): 93–106. https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.15868.

Afandi, Fachrizal. 2022. "Researching the Legal Culture of the Bureaucracy: An Introduction to Ethnographic Study of Procedural Criminal Law (Meneliti Budaya Hukum Aparat: Sebuah Pengantar tentang Etnografi dalam Studi Hukum Acara Pidana)." The Indonesian Journal of Socio-Legal Studies 1 (2): article 1. https://doi.org/10.54816/ijsls.2022.1.2.1.

Aharoni, Eyal, Heather M. Kleider-Offutt, and Sarah F. Brosnan. 2021. "Correctional 'Free Lunch'? Cost Neglect Increases Punishment in Prosecutors." Frontiers in Psychology 12: 778293. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.778293.

Aharoni, Eyal, Heather M. Kleider-Offutt, Sarah F. Brosnan, and Jordan Watzek. 2019. "Justice at Any Cost? The Impact of Cost–Benefit Salience on Criminal Punishment Judgments." Behavioral Sciences & the Law 37 (1): 38–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2388.

Aharoni, Eyal, Eddy Nahmias, Monica B. Hoffman, and Silvia Fernandes. 2023. "Punishment as a Scarce Resource: A Potential Policy Intervention for Managing Incarceration Rates." Frontiers in Psychology 14: 1157460. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1157460.

Annison, Harry. 2018. "Politics and Penal Change: Towards an Interpretive Political Analysis of Penal Policymaking." The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice 57 (3): 302–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/hojo.12269.

Ariapramuda, Cassis Merinthia, dan Irwan Triadi. 2023. "Perluasan Objek Praperadilan sebagai Bentuk Rechtsvinding (Analisis Putusan Pengadilan Nomor 38/Pid.Prap/2012/PN.Jkt-Sel dan Perbandingan dengan Judicial Review di Malaysia)." Indonesian Journal of Law and Justice 3 (1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.47134/ijlj.v3i1.4897.

Arlen, Jennifer. 1998. "The Future of Behavioral Economic Analysis of Law." Vanderbilt Law Review 51 (6): 1765–88.

Banerjee, Sanchayan, and Peter John. 2025. "Behavioral Public Policy: Past, Present, and Future." Policy and Society, puaf012. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puaf012.

Ciappi, S., E. Dalla Chiara, A. Padovani, F. Perali, and B. Santagata. 2022. "A Method to Measure Standard Costs of Juvenile Justice Systems: The Example of Italy." Youth Justice 22 (1): 21–48.

Feeley, Malcolm M. 1973. "Two Models of the Criminal Justice System: An Organizational Perspective." Law & Society Review 7 (3): 407–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/3052922.

Feeley, Malcolm M. 2001. "Three Voices of Socio-Legal Studies." Israel Law Review 35 (2–3): 175–204. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021223700012176.

Frans, Mardian P., Agustina Indah, Darisa Winda, dkk. 2024. "Plea Bargaining System, Deferred Prosecution Agreement, dan Judicial Scrutiny sebagai Upaya Mengatasi Overkapasitas Lembaga Pemasyarakatan." Perspektif Hukum 24 (2): 147–73. https://doi.org/10.30649/ph.v24i2.273.

Garrett, Brandon L. 2012. "Habeas Corpus and Due Process." Cornell Law Review 98 (1): 47–102.

Godefroid, M. E., R. Plattfaut, and B. Niehaves. 2023. "How to Measure the Status Quo Bias? A Review of Current Literature." Management Review Quarterly 73: 1667–1711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-022-00283-8.

Hagan, John. 1977. "Criminal Justice in Rural and Urban Communities: A Study of the Bureaucratization of Justice." Social Forces 55 (3): 597–612. https://doi.org/10.2307/2577458.

Hergadinata, Hafid. 2020. "Mengurai Gugurnya Praperadilan Edward Soeryadjaya atas Dualisme Pemaknaan Ketentuan Pasal 82 Ayat (1) Huruf d Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana." Verstek 8 (3). Bagian Hukum Acara, Universitas Sebelas Maret.

Hidayat, Maskur. 2015. "Pembaruan Hukum terhadap Lembaga Praperadilan melalui Putusan Pengadilan." Yuridika 30 (3): 505–25. https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v30i3.1953.

Horn, Adam. 2025. "Scalia and the King: The Ancient Writ of Habeas Corpus and the Missing Legitimacy Core of Modern Habeas Law." Yale Law Journal Forum 134: 737–64.

Hussin, A. A., A. A. Jumdail, R. T. Baculo, A. Q. Alpapara, and N. S. Jaam. 2025. "Power, Politics, and Policing in Southeast Asia: An Integrative Review of Political Constraints in Law Enforcement Agencies." International Journal of Sustainability and Advanced Integrated Research 1 (2): 62–67. https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsair.V1.I2.9.

Ilyas, Adam, Fachrizal Afandi, dan Indah Dwi Qurbani. 2025. "Closing the Injustice Gap: Reconstructing Pre-Trial Proceedings As an Effective Remedy for Victims of Terminated Preliminary Inquiries: Menutup Celah Ketidakadilan: Rekonstruksi Praperadilan Sebagai Effective Remedy Bagi Korban Penghentian Penyelidikan." Jurnal Konstitusi 22 (4): 736–76. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk2247.

Jackson, Vicki C. 2006. "World Habeas Corpus." Cornell Law Review 91 (2): 303–52. http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol91/iss2/2.

Kubrin, Charis E., and Rebecca Tublitz. 2022. "How to Think about Criminal Justice Reform: Conceptual and Practical Considerations." American Journal of Criminal Justice 47 (6): 1050–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-022-09712-6.

Kutner, Luis. 1967. "World Habeas Corpus, Human Rights and World Community." DePaul Law Review 17 (1): 3–38.

Kutner, Luis. 1985. "World Habeas Corpus and Humanitarian Intervention." Valparaiso University Law Review 19 (3): 593–631. https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol19/iss3/1.

Lee, Youngsub, Cholsoo Koh, and Joon Bae Suh. 2025. "How Much Is the Crime Prevention Programme for Fraud Worth? On the Cost Benefit Analysis in the Case of Police with Unsolved Cases Remaining." International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice 81: 100744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2025.100744.

McNeal, Gregory S. 2011. "The Status Quo Bias and Counterterrorism Detention." Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 101 (3): 855–902. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol101/iss3/5.

Moeliono, Tristam P., dan Widati Wulandari. 2016. "Asas Legalitas dalam Hukum Acara Pidana: Kritikan terhadap Putusan MK tentang Praperadilan." Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 22 (4): 594–616. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol22.iss4.art4.

Nagin, Daniel S., Alex R. Piquero, Elizabeth S. Scott, and Laurence Steinberg. 2006. "Public Preferences for Rehabilitation versus Incarceration of Juvenile Offenders: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation Survey." Criminology & Public Policy 5 (4): 627–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00406.x.

Noor, Andreyan, dan Muhammad Nurcholis A. 2024. "Urgensi dan Tantangan Upaya Paksa (Dwang Middelen) dalam Penegakan Hukum di Indonesia." Journal Juristic 5 (1): 1–9. https://journal.universitasaudi.ac.id/index.php/JJR/article/view/376.

Nurahman, Dwi. 2015. "Kebijakan Rekonstruksi Pengaturan Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana Tahun 2015." Pranata Hukum 10 (2): 168–80.

Packer, Herbert L. 1964. "Two Models of the Criminal Process." University of Pennsylvania Law Review 113 (1): 1–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/3310562.

Pane, Kristel Putri R., Gomgom T. P. Siregar, dan Syawal Amry Siregar. 2020. "Tinjauan Yuridis terhadap Praperadilan sebagai Upaya Kontrol bagi Penyidik dalam Perkara Pidana di Indonesia." Jurnal Prointegrita 5 (3): 511–19. https://doi.org/10.46930/jurnalprointegrita.v5i3.797.

Pangaribuan, A. M. A. 2021. "Menyegarkan Pendekatan Studi Hukum Acara Pidana." Mimbar Hukum 33 (2): 373–400. https://doi.org/10.22146/mh.v33i2.3727.

Pangaribuan, Aristo. 2025. "Authority, Rights, and Reform: Legislative Struggles over Indonesia's Criminal Procedure Code (1979–1981)." Asian Journal of Comparative Law 20 (1): 100–119. https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2025.10004.

Rahmi, Alvia, Muhammad Nur Syahbani, dan Andi Titah Niagara Unga Putri. 2025. "Ketiadaan Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan Dalam RUU KUHAP 2025: Ancaman Judicial Scrutiny dan Perlindungan HAM: The Absence of Preliminary Examination Judges in the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code Bill: Threats to Judicial Scrutiny and Human Rights Protection." Jurnal Hukum Pidana Indonesia 2 (1): 1–20. https://journal.asperhupiki.id/index.php/jhpi/article/view/27.

Samuelson, William, and Richard Zeckhauser. 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1 (1): 7–59.

Shinnar, Shlomo, and Reuel Shinnar. 1975. "The Effects of the Criminal Justice System on the Control of Crime: A Quantitative Approach." Law & Society Review 9 (4): 581–611. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053340.

Siallagan, Haposan. 2016. "Penerapan Prinsip Negara Hukum di Indonesia." Sosiohumaniora: Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora 18 (2): 131–37. https://doi.org/10.24198/sosiohumaniora.v18i2.9947.

Stuntz, William J. 1997. "The Uneasy Relationship between Criminal Procedure and Criminal Justice." The Yale Law Journal 107 (1): 1–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/797276.

Sunstein, Cass R., Christine Jolls, and Richard H. Thaler. 1998. "A Behavioral Approach to Law and Economics." Stanford Law Review 50 (5): 1471–1550.

Syachdin, dan Joko Jumadi. 2018. "Efektivitas Praperadilan dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak di Indonesia." Jatiswara: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 33 (1): 1–11. https://www.academia.edu/download/74033940/134.pdf.

Tamanaha, Brian Z. 2008. "A Holistic Vision of the Socio-Legal Terrain." Law and Contemporary Problems 71 (2): 89–98. https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/lcp/vol71/iss2/7.

Taslitz, Andrew E. 2012. "Trying Not to Be like Sisyphus: Can Defense Counsel Overcome Pervasive Status Quo Bias in the Criminal Justice System." Texas Tech Law Review 45 (1): 315–78.

Turnip, Rustam Efendi. 2020. "Konsep Dasar terkait Due Process of Law." Jurnal Hukum Justice 3 (2): 221–31. https://ejournal.ust.ac.id/index.php/JHJ/article/view/6225.

Zedner, Lucia, and Carl-Friedrich Stuckenberg. 2020. "Due Process." Dalam Core Concepts in Criminal Law and Criminal Justice: Volume I, disunting oleh Kai Ambos, Antony Duff, Julian Roberts, Thomas Weigend, dan Alexander Heinze, 304–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tesis dan Disertasi

Pangaribuan, Aristo Marisi Adiputra. 2022. "Cooperation and Non-Cooperation in Indonesian Criminal Case Processing: Ego Sektoral in Action." Disertasi PhD, University of Washington. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (29261275).

 

Sumber Daring dan Berita

Ali. 2007. "Hakim Komisaris Masih Terus Diperdebatkan." Hukumonline, 24 Juli 2007. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/hakim-komisaris-masih-terus-diperdebatkan-hol18142.

Ali. 2013. "Wamenkumham: Hakim Komisaris Bukan untuk Melemahkan KPK." Hukumonline, 24 Oktober 2013. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/wamenkumham--hakim-komisaris-bukan-untuk-melemahkan-kpk-lt52694866aab07.

Ali, M. 2010. "RUU KUHAP Harus Tuntaskan Kebiasaan Bolak-balik Berkas Perkara." Hukumonline, 14 April 2010. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ruu-kuhap-harus-tuntaskan-kebiasaan-bolakbalik-berkas-perkara-lt4bc5f1455d6a9.

Azizah, Amalia. 2025. "Menggagas Mekanisme Penilaian Probable Cause di Indonesia: Pembelajaran dari Amerika Serikat dan Georgia." Hukumonline, 19 September 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/menggagas-mekanisme-penilaian-probable-cause-di-indonesia--pembelajaran-dari-amerika-serikat-dan-georgia-lt68cd3070361da.

Azzahra, Nabiila. 2025. "Seberapa Penting Aturan Hakim Komisaris Masuk KUHAP." Tempo.co, 9 Juli 2025. https://www.tempo.co/hukum/hakim-komisaris-pengawasan-kuhap-1945235.

BBC News Indonesia. 2015. "Hakim Nyatakan Penetapan Tersangka Budi Gunawan Tidak Sah." BBC News Indonesia, 16 Februari 2015. https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/berita_indonesia/2015/02/150216_vonis_budigunawan_kpk.

BBC News Indonesia. 2025. "PN Jaksel Gugurkan Praperadilan Hasto Terkait Tersangka Suap—Bagaimana Jejaknya Sebagai Tersangka Hingga Ditahan KPK?" BBC News Indonesia, 10 Maret 2025. https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/articles/cgmyp4z4j49o.

Breslin, Beau, dan Thomas Tandy Lewis. 2022. "Judicial Scrutiny." EBSCO Research Starters: Law. Ipswich, MA: EBSCO Information Services. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/judicial-scrutiny.

CR. 2025. "Pengawasan Lemah terhadap Kewenangan Lembaga Penegak Hukum Dinilai Ancaman." Hukumonline, 26 Maret 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/pengawasan-lemah-terhadap-kewenangan-lembaga-penegak-hukum-dinilai-ancaman-lt67e376854f018.

CR-3. 2009. "Masih Pentingnya Mendorong Konsep Hakim Komisaris." Hukumonline, 10 Desember 2009. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/masih-pentingnya-mendorong-konsep-hakim-komisaris-----hol21203.

Hidayat. 2019. "Pentingnya Prinsip Fair Trial dalam Vonis Mati." Hukumonline, 16 Januari 2019. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/pentingnya-prinsip-fair-trial-dalam-vonis-mati-lt5c3f0c5f924e2.

IHW. 2007. "Aksi Kekerasan Polisi dalam Penyidikan Tak Dapat Dibenarkan." Hukumonline, 23 Mei 2007. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/aksi-kekerasan-polisi-dalam-penyidikan-tak-dapat-dibenarkan-hol17335.

Kort-Butler, Lisa. 2016. "Content Analysis in the Study of Crime, Media, and Popular Culture." Faculty Publications, Sociology Department, University of Nebraska–Lincoln. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/sociologyfacpub/575.

M-8. 2009. "Kelemahan KUHAP, Lubang untuk Rekayasa." Hukumonline, 16 November 2009. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/kelemahan-kuhap-lubang-untuk-rekayasa-lt4b01899ac57bf.

MYS. 2012. "KUHAP Posisikan Manusia Lebih Rendah daripada Barang." Hukumonline, 20 November 2012. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/kuhap-posisikan-manusia-lebih-rendah-daripada-barang-lt50ab597722e88.

MYS. 2013. "Dua Prinsip yang Dipegang Tim Penyusun RUU KUHAP." Hukumonline, 27 November 2013. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/dua-prinsip-yang-dipegang-tim-penyusun-ruu-kuhap-lt52959b4b044b5.

Mys/Amr. 2003. "Praperadilan Tidak Efektif, Revisi KUHAP Perkenalkan Institusi Hakim Komisaris." Hukumonline, 15 Oktober 2003. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/praperadilan-tidak-efektif-revisi-kuhap-perkenalkan-institusi-hakim-komisaris-hol8981.

Mys/CR-7. 2009. "Penelitian KHN: Praperadilan Mengandung Banyak Kelemahan." Hukumonline, 17 Desember 2009. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/penelitian-khn-praperadilan-mengandung-banyak-kelemahan-lt4b29bab9ef3a7.

Nay/Amr. 2003. "Buyung: Tidak Perlu Ada Hakim Komisaris." Hukumonline, 17 Oktober 2003. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/buyung-tidak-perlu-ada-hakim-komisaris-hol9001.

NOV, RFQ, dan M-14. 2013. "RKUHAP Perlu Pertegas Aturan Penyadapan bagi KPK." Hukumonline, 3 April 2013. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/rkuhap-perlu-pertegas-aturan-penyadapan-bagi-kpk-lt515433bae758f.

Pratama, Ahnaf Alaudin Bayu. 2025. "Praperadilan: Senjata Hukum Melawan Kriminalisasi Status Tersangka." TSP Law Firm, 1 Juli 2025. https://tsplawfirm.id/2025/07/praperadilan-senjata-hukum-melawan-kriminalisasi-status-tersangka/.

Rahmi, Novrieza. 2012. "Kejagung Verzet atas Putusan Praperadilan Chevron." Hukumonline, 3 Desember 2012. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/kejagung-iverzet-i-atas-putusan-praperadilan-chevron-lt50bcbdc4432dd/.

Ramadhan, Choky R. 2025. "Benteng Keadilan atau Stempel Kekuasaan? Peran Pengadilan dalam R-KUHAP." Hukumonline, 15 Juni 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/benteng-keadilan-atau-stempel-kekuasaan-peran-pengadilan-dalam-r-kuhap-lt684efd122f420.

RFQ. 2012. "Berkas Sudah Dilimpahkan Praperadilan Gugur." Hukumonline, 14 Agustus 2012. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/berkas-sudah-dilimpahkan--praperadilan-gugur-lt5029f18cea6dc/.

RFQ. 2013a. "Materi RKUHAP Dinilai Tidak Pro Pemberantasan Korupsi." Hukumonline, 29 Oktober 2013. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/materi-rkuhap-dinilai-tidak-pro-pemberantasan-korupsi-lt52708ef453c89.

RFQ. 2013b. "RKUHAP Belum Detail Atur Soal Penyadapan." Hukumonline, 1 November 2013. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/rkuhap-belum-detail-atur-soal-penyadapan-lt527b76e51ba49.

RFQ. 2014a. "Tanpa Penyelidikan, Eksistensi KPK Bakal Lenyap." Hukumonline, 11 Februari 2014. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/tanpa-penyelidikan--eksistensi-kpk-bakal-lenyap-lt52f9fc56c2610.

RFQ. 2014b. "Jika Melemahkan KPK, RKUHAP Tak Perlu Dibahas." Hukumonline, 12 Februari 2014. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/jika-melemahkan-kpk--rkuhap-tak-perlu-dibahas-lt52fb71e52d33b.

Sudrajat. 2021. "Menakar Akuntabilitas Penahanan." Hukumonline, 21 Juli 2021. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/menakar-akuntabilitas-penahanan-lt60f8e47862f68.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025a. "9 Substansi Usulan Kamar Pidana MA untuk RUU KUHAP." Hukumonline, 12 Februari 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/9-substansi-usulan-kamar-pidana-ma-untuk-ruu-kuhap-lt67ac84e124295.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025b. "Ini Penjelasan Ketua Komisi III soal Dihapusnya HPP dari Draf RKUHAP." Hukumonline, 21 April 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ini-penjelasan-ketua-komisi-iii-soal-dihapusnya-hpp-dari-draf-rkuhap-lt6805b95e2a060.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025c. "Demi Check and Balances, Pentingnya Mendorong Omnibus Law UU Cipta Keadilan." Hukumonline, 19 Mei 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/demi-check-and-balances--pentingnya-mendorong-omnibus-law-uu-cipta-keadilan-lt682ac100cef0a.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025d. "Persatuan Doktor Pascasarjana Hukum Indonesia Usul HPP Tak Perlu Masuk RUU KUHAP." Hukumonline, 22 Mei 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/persatuan-doktor-pascasarjana-hukum-indonesia-usul-hpp-tak-perlu-masuk-ruu-kuhap-lt682ee069e8c3e/.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025e. "Pengawasan Penegakan Hukum Tak Cukup melalui Praperadilan." Hukumonline, 11 Juni 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/pengawasan-penegakan-hukum-tak-cukup-melalui-praperadilan-lt6848d4d1aec18.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025f. "Pakar Hukum Konstitusi: Penyelidikan Tak Perlu Upaya Paksa." Hukumonline, 20 Juni 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/pakar-hukum-konstitusi--penyelidikan-tak-perlu-upaya-paksa-lt6854bdf5ede5b.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025g. "Urgensi HPP dalam RUU KUHAP untuk Perkuat Perlindungan HAM." Hukumonline, 30 Juni 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/urgensi-hpp-dalam-ruu-kuhap-untuk-perkuat-perlindungan-ham-lt686231c2ecfe9.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025h. "Begini Alasan Pemerintah Dihapusnya Hakim Pemeriksa Pendahuluan dari Draf RUU KUHAP." Hukumonline, 1 Juli 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/begini-alasan-pemerintah-dihapusnya-hakim-pemeriksa-pendahuluan-dari-draf-ruu-kuhap-lt6863391b6ad6b.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025i. "Perkuat Perlindungan HAM melalui Mekanisme Judicial Scrutiny." Hukumonline, 9 Juli 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/perkuat-perlindungan-ham-melalui-mekanisme-judicial-scrutiny-lt686dc788dca47.

Thea DA, Ady. 2025j. "YLBHI Usul RUU KUHAP Dibahas Ulang." Hukumonline, 8 Agustus 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ylbhi-usul-ruu-kuhap-dibahas-ulang-lt68954bfa0695d.

Recommended Citation

Ramadhan, Choky Risda; Aini, Abni Nur; and Khairunisa, Dheliana (2026) "Status Quo Bias dalam Reformasi Hukum Acara Pidana di Indonesia: Kegagalan Penguatan Pengawasan Pengadilan (Judicial Scrutiny) yang Lebih Optimal," The Indonesian Journal of Socio-Legal Studies: Vol. 6: No. 1, Article 5.
DOI: 10.54828/ijsls.2026v6n1.5
Available at: https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/ijsls/vol6/iss1/5