Harmonisasi Standar Etik Aparat Penegak Hukum dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia

Dwityas Witarti Rabawati; Finsensius Samara; Yohanes Leonardus Ngompat; Maria Fransiska Owa Da Santo; Filemon Ngebos

doi:10.55681/jige.v7i4.7222

Authors

Dwityas Witarti Rabawati Universitas Katolik Widya Mandira
Finsensius Samara Universitas Katolik Widya Mandira
Yohanes Leonardus Ngompat Universitas Katolik Widya Mandira
Maria Fransiska Owa Da Santo Universitas Katolik Widya Mandira
Filemon Ngebos universitas katolik widya mandira

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55681/jige.v7i4.7222

Keywords:

Harmonisation of Ethical Standards, Law Enforcement Officials, Ethical Accountability, Judicial Integrity, Criminal Justice System

Abstract

The regulation of ethical standards for law enforcement officials in Indonesia remains dispersed across various laws and professional codes, each with different legal foundations, supervisory bodies, examination procedures, sanctions, and levels of transparency. Such fragmentation may result in inconsistent standards of ethical accountability and weaken the integration of the criminal justice system. This study aims to analyse the fragmentation of ethical regulation and enforcement among law enforcement officials and to formulate harmonised ethical standards for strengthening the integrity of Indonesia’s criminal justice system. This study employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and systemic approaches. Primary legal materials include legislation, professional codes of ethics, and official documents issued by ethics supervisory bodies, while secondary legal materials comprise books, journal articles, and relevant research. The legal materials are qualitatively analysed through legal interpretation and prescriptive legal reasoning. The findings demonstrate that differences in standards of conduct, supervisory mechanisms, examination procedures, and sanctions have resulted in sectoral ethical enforcement and inadequate inter-institutional coordination. Harmonisation does not require the uniform codification of all professional codes. Instead, it requires minimum cross-professional ethical standards encompassing integrity, independence, impartiality, accountability, transparency, prevention of conflicts of interest, protection of rights in ethical proceedings, proportionality of sanctions, and disclosure of decisions. Such harmonisation is necessary to establish consistent ethical accountability and strengthen public confidence in the criminal justice system.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2000). Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization, 54(3), 421–456.

Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (1990). https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/basic-principles-role-lawyers

Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (1979). https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/code-conduct-law-enforcement-officials

Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors. (1990).

Hayqal, D., Dwilaksana, C., & Setyabudi, C. M. (2023). Enforcing the Professional and Police Codes of Ethics to Address Violations Committed by Police Officers. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review, 6(5), 516–524.

Irwansyah, I. (2020). Penelitian Hukum: Pilihan Metode & Praktik Penulisan Artikel, Mirra Buana Media. Yogyakarta. https://doi. org/10.1163/9789004311947.

Kode Etik Advokat Komite Kerja Advokat Indonesia Kode Etik Advokat Indonesia Ikatan Advokat Indonesia (Ikadin) (2002).

Komisi Yudisial. (2009). Keputusan Bersama Ketua Mahkamah Agung Ri Dan Ketua Komisi Yudisial Ri Nomor 047/KMA/SKB/IV/2009 02/SKB/P.KY/IV/2009. Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Agung, 1–21. 047/KMA/SKB/IV/2009%0A02/SKB/P.KY/IV/2009

Lubis, F., Dewi, A. P., Alvionita, R., Putri, A. D. J., Hambali, L., & Lingga, T. M. (2025). Eksistensi Kode Etik Profesi Advokat di Indonesia. Innovative: Journal Of Social Science Research, 5(1), 4090–4099.

Makkarateng, M. Y. (2022). PENGARUH KODE ETIK PROFESI TERHADAP KINERJA APARAT PENEGAK HUKUM DI INDONESIA. Jurnal Ar-Risalah, 2(2), 29–38.

Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian Hukum (13th ed., Vol. 13). KENCANA.

Nggabut, G. D. B., Bano, A. E. B., Bria, D., Mamengko, K. M., & Mudamakin, Y. C. S. (2024). Penegakan hukum terhadap pelanggaran kode etik advokat. Perkara: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik, 2(1), 300–310. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/guidelines-role-prosecutors

Parlan, S. D., Seran, S. T., Tupen, M. S. W., Corebima, M. A. R., & Rabawati, D. W. (2025). ANALISIS PELANGGARAN KODE ETIK HAKIM MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI DALAM PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 90/PUU-XXI/2023. JOURNAL OF LAW AND NATION, 4(1), 111–119.

Peraturan Kejaksaan Nomor 4 Tahun 2024 Kode Perilaku Jaksa Dan Tata Cara Pemeriksaan Atas Pelanggaran Kode Perilaku Jaksa (2024).

Peraturan Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 7 Tahun 2022 (2022).

Soekanto, S. (2013). Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Penegakan Hukum. Rajawali Pers.

Suharni, M., Huler, K. G. W., Febryanto, B., & Rabawati, D. W. (2024). Penegakan Kode Etik Profesi Kepolisian. Jurnal Hukum, Politik Dan Ilmu Sosial, 3(1), 151–159.

Tamelab, V., Rabawati, D. W., Seran, A. I. P., & Payon, M. V. E. (2024). Problematika Pelaksanaan Etika Profesi Hakim Dalam Dunia Peradilan. Student Scientific Creativity Journal, 2(1), 123–135.

Tardjono, H. (2021). Urgensi Etika Profesi Hukum Sebagai Upaya Penegakan Hukum Yang Berkeadilan Di Indonesia. Jurnal Kepastian Hukum Dan Keadilan, 3(2), 51–64.

The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002). https://www.unodc.org/documents/ji/training/bangaloreprinciples.pdf

Tobu, E., Mabilani, G. M. G., & Rabawati, D. W. (2024). Penegakan kode etika profesi hakim konstitusi. HUMANITIS: Jurnal Homaniora, Sosial Dan Bisnis, 2(1), 78–87.