KONSTRUKSI YURIDIS PENGATURAN BANTUAN JURU BAHASA BAGI TERDAKWA

Erwin Susilo; Muhammad Rafi

doi:10.23969/litigasi.v25i2.17359

Authors

Erwin Susilo Pengadilan Negeri Sigli
Muhammad Rafi Pengadilan Negeri Sabang

Keywords:

Interpreter

defendant

Human Rights

Abstract

The defendant has the right to present a defense, and to guarantee that the defendants must understand the facts that arise during trials. The Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), yet still superficial, does regulate the mechanism for appointing an interpreter. This study aims to elaborate: first, the urgency of an interpreter during trial; and second, how the law regulates the existence of an interpreter assistance for defendants. This research uses a normative juridical method. Based on the problem mentioned above, the conclusion is as follows: First, the appointment of an interpreter aims to ensure equality between the defendant and the prosecutor. Those conditions will lead to a verdict based on substantive truth by the judge. Second, the judge must use an official decree to appoint an interpreter, granting them legal authority during the trial. Before the interpreter translates any facts in the trial, they must first take an oath or pledge. An interpreter who provides intentionally false translations will be charged under Article 242 of the Criminal Code. Additionally, an interpreter who has been appointed but fails to fulfill their duties can be penalized under Article 224 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code, and if the interpreter unlawfully fails to appear, they can be penalized under Article 522 of the Criminal Code. This study recommends that future reforms of the Criminal Procedure Code explicitly state that judges should appoint interpreters through official decrees and interpreters should be certified and integrated into the criminal justice system.

Downloads

References

Efendi, J., & Ibrahim, J. (2018). Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris. Kencana.

Effendi, E. (2021). Hukum Acara Pidana Perspektif KUHAP dan Peraturan Lainnya. PT. Refika Aditama.

Fauziah Lubis. (2020). Bunga Rampai Hukum Acara Pidana. CV. Manhaji.

Hopkins, A. (2015). Equality before the Law: The Importance of Understanding the Experience of’others’ in the Criminal Justice System [University of Canberra]. https://researchsystem.canberra.edu.au/ws/portalfiles/portal/33677769/file

Kwakman, N. J. M. (2017). De illusie van de materiële waarheid en de houdbaarheid van de doelstelling van de materiële waarheidsvinding in het strafproces. Strafblad, 6, nr. 64.

Lamintang, P. A. F., & Lamintang, T. (2013). Pembahasan KUHAP Menurut Ilmu Pengetahuan Hukum Pidana & Yurisprudensi. Sinar Grafika.

Langford, I. (2009). Fair Trial : The History of an Idea . Journal of Human Rights, 8(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14754830902765857

Lanza, G. (2020). Fake News and the Challenges of Criminal Law. Journal of Eastern European Criminal Law, 2. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marina-Matic-Boskovic/publication/357096094_Implications_of_New_Technologies_on_Criminal_Justice_System/links/61bb72884b318a6970e7943c/Implications-of-New-Technologies-on-Criminal-Justice-System.pdf#page=33

Lubis, A. F. (2023). The Right to a Fair Trial: Comparative Analysis of International Human Rights Standards. The Easta Journal Law and Human Rights, 1(03). https://doi.org/10.58812/eslhr.v1i03.88

Lumempouw, B. (2013). Hak Terdakwa Melakukan Upaya Hukum Dalam Proses Peradilan Pidana. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9).

McEvoy, G. (2023). Language proficiency and the right to an interpreter when accessing a fair trial. Translation and Interpreting, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.115202.2023.a09

Meyerson, D., & Mackenzie, C. (2018). Procedural justice and the law. Philosophy Compass, 13(12). https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12548

Naufal, R. S., Rusmiati, E., & Ramdan, A. (2021). Urgensi Pembaharuan Hukum Autopsi dalam Proses Penyidikan Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan untuk Mencapai Kebenaran Materiil. Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, 18(3). https://doi.org/10.54629/jli.v18i3.737

Nugroho, B. (2017). PERANAN ALAT BUKTI DALAM PERKARA PIDANA DALAM PUTUSAN HAKIM MENURUT KUHAP. Yuridika, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v32i1.4780

Prasetyo, T., & Kameo, J. (2020). PERADILAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA: SUATU PERSPEKTIF MENURUT JURISPRUDENCE KEADILAN BERMARTABAT Teguh Prasetyo 1 , Jeferson Kameo 2. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 15(2).

Purukan, A. F. (2019). Delik Tidak Memenuhi Pelaksanaan Kewajiban Sebagai Saksi, Ahli Atau Juru Bahasa Menurut Pasal 224 Dan Pasal 522 Kuhp. Lex Crimen, VIII(8).

Rogers, A., Hine, K., Prenzler, T., Rogers, A., Hine, K., & Prenzler, T. (2024). Understanding the decline : a procedural justice approach to the key factors behind the downward shift in opinions of police police. Criminal Justice Studies, 00(00), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2024.2329955

Saunders, N. (2023). Security, digital border technologies, and immigration admissions: Challenges of and to non-discrimination, liberty and equality. European Journal of Political Theory. https://doi.org/10.1177/14748851231203912

Sherman, J. (2016). The Right to an Interpreter under Customary International Law. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2773013

Spohn, C., Verhagen, M., & Walker, J. (2022). Revisting Sentencing Reform. In J. B. Gould & P. R. Metzger (Ed.), Transforming Criminal Justice. New York University Press.

Yosua, K., Dientje, R., & Turangan, D. D. (2022). Peranan Saksi, Ahli, dan Juru Bahasa Bagi Peradilan Pidana. Lex Crimen, 11(2).

Zemach, A. (2011). Reconciling Universal Jurisdiction with Equality Before the Law. Texas international law journal, 47(1).