Expert Says Naming Febrie Adriansyah a Suspect Without Prior Questioning Violates the Law

Guru Besar Ilmu Hukum Universitas Al Azhar Indonesia (UAI) Suparji Ahmad has stated that the naming of Febrie Adriansyah as a suspect without prior examination contradicts statutory regulations. He noted that if a person is designated a suspect without first being summoned and examined regarding the alleged criminal offence, the determination potentially violates Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, which is final and binding, as well as the due process of law principle. Suparji explained that the Constitutional Court interpreted that the phrase ‘preliminary evidence’ must be understood as at least two valid pieces of evidence, accompanied by an examination of the prospective suspect before they are formally named a suspect. He added that since the ruling, it is insufficient to rely solely on two pieces of evidence; investigators are obliged to give the individual an opportunity to be heard. Although the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) does not recognise the term ‘prospective suspect’, in practice, this examination is conducted in the capacity of a witness. This principle, he said, has been further strengthened in the new Criminal Procedure Code under Law Number 20 of 2025, which prioritises human rights protection, the presumption of innocence, fair trial, and a balance between investigative authority and citizens’ rights. Suparji assessed that law enforcement must not only pursue effectiveness but also adhere to fair procedures, and the validity of a suspect designation made without prior examination can be challenged through a pretrial motion.