Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Based on the Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014 Determination of the suspect as one of the objects of pretrial which in practice the trial process presents fact witnesses which has an impact on giving false information as referred to in Article 22 Jo Article 35 of Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Acts Corruption Crime. This study aims to analyze and find a reconstruction of the determination of the suspect in giving false testimony at the pretrial hearing in Article 22 of the Corruption Crime Law in Indonesia based on Pancasila justice. This research is a qualitative descriptive research. The approach used in this research is social legal research. In this study it was found that the Regulation of giving false testimony at the Pretrial hearing in Article 22 of the Corruption Crime Law in Indonesia after the Constitutional Court decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014 has not been based on Pancasila values of justice, because law enforcement is against witnesses who give false statements in pretrial hearings. Corruption has not been regulated clearly and unequivocally in Article 22 of Law 31/1999, so that in practice there are differences in perceptions between investigators who are given the authority to determine suspects and judges who examine the principal case. Reconstruction of Regulations The regulation for the determination of suspects for giving false testimony at the Pretrial hearing in Article 22 of the Corruption Law becomes Paragraph (1). Everyone as referred to in Article 28, Article 29, Article 35, or Article 36 who intentionally does not provide information or provides information that is not true, shall be punished with imprisonment for a minimum of 3 (three) years and a maximum of 12 (twelve) years and/or a fine of at least Rp. 150,000,000.00 (one hundred fifty million rupiahs) and a maximum of Rp. 600,000,000.00 (six hundred million rupiahs). Paragraph (2). Punished with the same punishment as paragraph 1 (one) if the act is committed at a pretrial hearing.
Samuda et al. (Fri,) studied this question.