{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1662659,
        "msgid": "questioning-the-cassation-appeal-against-acquittal-verdict-following-the-new-criminal-procedure-code-1775606648",
        "date": "2026-04-08 05:39:02",
        "title": "Questioning the Cassation Appeal Against Acquittal Verdict Following the New Criminal Procedure Code",
        "author": "Ardito Ramadhan",
        "source": "KOMPAS",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "The prosecutor's cassation appeal against the acquittal of Delpedro Marhaen and three other activists in the August 2025 incitement case has sparked legal debate, as the new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), effective in 2026, explicitly prohibits such appeals against acquittals under Article 299(2)(a). Legal expert Albert Aries from Trisakti University argues that this provision applies universally without exceptions, including for corruption cases, and suggests appeals as a more appropriate alternative to review both legal and factual aspects. He emphasises adherence to the lex mitior principle in transitional rules, prioritising provisions most favourable to the accused.",
        "content": "<p>JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com \u2013 The cassation appeal filed by the public\nprosecutor in the August 2025 incitement demonstration case against\nDelpedro Marhaen and three other activists, who have been acquitted, has\ntriggered a legal debate. This is because Article 299 Paragraph (2)\nletter a of the new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), which comes into\neffect in 2026, states that cassation cannot be filed against an\nacquittal decision. \u201cThe filing of a cassation examination cannot be\ncarried out against an acquittal decision,\u201d said criminal law expert\nfrom Trisakti University, Albert Aries, to Kompas.com on Tuesday\n(7\/4\/2026). According to him, this provision is firm and applies to all\ntypes of criminal offences without exception, including corruption\ncases. Thus, for any acquittal decision, including in corruption\noffences, the legal remedy of cassation is no longer available. Albert\nacknowledges that the potential for errors in first-instance court\ndecisions remains a real issue in judicial practice. However, he states\nthat this cannot be used as a reason to reopen the space for cassation,\nwhich has been explicitly closed by the law. In this context, he also\nviews the old debate regarding the classification of \u201cpure acquittal\u201d\nand \u201cnon-pure acquittal\u201d as no longer relevant to revive, because the\nnew KUHAP no longer provides room for such distinction in relation to\nlegal remedies. As an alternative, Albert opines that the more\nappropriate mechanism to challenge an acquittal decision is through the\nappeal process. By opening the avenue for appeals against acquittals,\nthe high court can re-examine not only legal aspects but also the facts\nrevealed in the trial, thus avoiding the absolute application of res\njudicata solely at the first-instance court level. Albert does not deny\nthat there are transitional provisions in the new KUHAP that are used as\nthe basis by the prosecutor to file cassation against the acquittal of\nDelpedro and his colleagues. Nevertheless, according to him, the\napplication of norms from such transitional procedural law should, as\nmuch as possible, adhere to the lex mitior principle, namely the rule\nthat the provision most favourable to the suspect, defendant, or convict\nmust be prioritised. In other words, if there are two applicable legal\nregimes that cause uncertainty, the choice must fall on the rule that is\nmore beneficial to the suspect, defendant, and convict.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/questioning-the-cassation-appeal-against-acquittal-verdict-following-the-new-criminal-procedure-code-1775606648",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}