Delpedro Appeal Sparks Debate on Old vs New Criminal Procedure Code, Yusril's Take

JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com — Coordinating Minister for Law, Human Rights, Immigration, and Correctional Services (Menko Kumham Imipas) Yusril Ihza Mahendra has spotlighted the reference to the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) in the appeal submission regarding the acquittal verdict for Delpedro Marhaen and three associates in the alleged incitement case related to the August 2025 demonstrations.

The difference in using the old and new KUHAP, according to Yusril, has triggered debate over the validity of the appeal filed by the Attorney General’s Office (Kejagung).

Yusril explained that in the Delpedro Marhaen et al. case, the investigation, inquiry, prosecution, and trial processes still used the old KUHAP. Meanwhile, the verdict in the case was handed down after 2 January 2026, when the new KUHAP had come into effect.

However, there is also a legal principle stating that if there is a change in law, the rule applied should be the one most favourable to the defendant.

“Can the prosecutor appeal against an acquittal verdict after the new KUHAP takes effect? Meanwhile, the new KUHAP states that in an acquittal decision, it is final, and the prosecutor may not appeal,” Yusril said when confirmed by Kompas.com on Tuesday (7/4/2026).

“Or can the prosecutor still file an appeal because the case began when the old KUHAP was still in use? This has become an academic debate,” he continued.

He opined that if the prosecutor still files the appeal, the decision on whether the appeal is permissible will be determined by the Supreme Court (MA). Meanwhile, Delpedro and his legal team can use the argument of legal change in their counter-memorandum to the MA.

On the other hand, the MA could declare the prosecutor’s appeal N.O. or Niet Ontvankelijke Verklaard, meaning “not receivable,” so the merits of the case are not examined.

Another possibility is that the MA will still examine the appeal petition. That decision is at the discretion of the cassation panel of judges handling the case.

“So because the prosecutor has filed the appeal, we just wait for the MA’s decision later,” Yusril stated.

The constitutional law expert also opined that in the future, if the investigation, inquiry, prosecution, and trial processes have used the new KUHAP, then against an acquittal verdict, no further legal remedies should be pursued.

This is in accordance with the provisions of Article 299 of the KUHAP.

“The prosecutor should not file further legal remedies to uphold legal certainty,” Yusril revealed.