KEWAJIBAN DIDAMPINGI PENASIHAT HUKUM TERHADAP TERSANGKA/TERDAKWA YANG TIDAK MAMPU YANG DIANCAM HUKUMAN 5 TAHUN PENJARA ATAU LEBIH SESUAI KETENTUAN PASAL 56 (1) KUHAP

Abstract

With the number of suspects receiving less humane treatment from investigators at
the investigation level, the application of the provisions of article 56 paragraph (1)
of the Criminal Procedure Code, especially at the Police level as Investigator,
there are still many who have not been able to realize it. Whereas the application
of Article 56 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the rights
of suspects to obtain legal aid at the trial level has been partially implemented,
especially in the District Courts located in major cities, although there are still
some courts that have not implemented the provisions Article 56 paragraph (1) for
the defendant who can not afford it. Whereas the implementation of the legal
assistance process for suspects/accusers as mandated in article 56 (1) of the
Criminal Procedure Code is not always smooth as expected by all parties, with the
argument that there is no legal counsel to be appointed in the jurisdiction, the
deliberate misconception that the appointment of a legal counselor necessarily
requires a special budget, and in such an institution is not budgeted, it is clearly a
constraint factor in enforcing the concept of article 56 (1) of the Criminal
Procedure Code. Seeing several laws and regulations governing the concept of
legal assistance to the suspect, that all existing laws are currently meeting the
expected criteria, as mandated in article 56 paragraph (1) of the Criminal
Procedure Code, but still exist some implementing regulations as a complement
that have not been made.