Transformation of the Principle of Balance of Rights in Indonesian Criminal Procedure Law

Criminal procedural law serves not only as an instrument of law enforcement but also as a mechanism for limiting state power and protecting individual rights. Normatively, several issues remain concerning coercive measures, the implementation of the presumption of innocence, the limitations of pretrial proceedings, and the effectiveness of legal assistance, indicating the need to balance law enforcement interests with individual rights protection. This study aims to analyze the balance between state authority and individual rights protection in criminal procedural law and to formulate directions for reform based on fair trial and proportionality. This study employs normative juridical research using statutory and conceptual approaches. The analysis examines criminal procedural provisions, human rights principles, and the concepts of due process, fair trial, and justice within Islamic legal thought. Criminal procedural law provides several guarantees for individual rights; however, an imbalance remains between the authority of law enforcement officials and available control mechanisms. The reactive nature of pretrial proceedings, the use of detention, and the limited effectiveness of legal assistance demonstrate the need to strengthen judicial control, restrict coercive measures through proportionality, and ensure effective legal assistance from the earliest stage of criminal proceedings. Criminal procedural law reform should establish a system capable of maintaining effective law enforcement while limiting state power through legality, proportionality, the presumption of innocence, judicial oversight, and human rights protection.