Professionalism of the Authority in Military Justice System in Indonesia

Abstract

In the military justice system, the regulation of investigative institutions, especially investigators on superiors with the right to punish (Ankum in the Military Court law, is not in accordance with the principle of professionalism because Ankum does not have investigative expertise and does not have functions related to judicial power. Therefore, the existence of investigators Superiors who have the right to punish will not guarantee due process law and cannot provide values of justice. The purpose of this study was to analyze the professionalism of investigators' authority in the military justice system in Indonesia. This study uses a constructivist paradigm and is a non-doctrinal type of research, with method of socio-legal research approach. This research is descriptive analytical, which is expected to be able to provide a detailed, systematic and comprehensive description of the object under study. The data used in this study are primary data and secondary data, namely data obtained from through interviews and from library materials collected through literature studies which were then analyzed qualitatively. The results showed that: First, Ankum was made an investigator of subordinates under his command authority, as a derivative of the principle of unity of command, and the principle of the commander in charge full responsibility to the unit and its subordinates, so that in the event that his subordinates commit a crime, Ankum can determine the fate of his subordinates. Ankum as an investigator has a legal gab, meaning that Ankum attributively in the law has the authority to investigate, but in fact Ankum cannot conduct an investigation and has never been sworn in as an investigator.