Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Open access Journal

Preliminary Examining Judges in Indonesian Criminal Procedure Reform: Lessons from Australia’s Committal Hearings

IJCLS (Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies) · Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026) · pp. 175–212

DOI
10.15294/ijcls.v11i1.25017
ISSN
2548-1576, 2548-1568
Published
2026-05-04
Publisher
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Language
eng
License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

Abstract

This study examines Indonesia’s Preliminary Examining Judges (PEJ) and compares them with Australia’s committal hearings. We ask whether the PEJ can better protect human rights and prevent abuses of authority in Indonesia’s criminal justice system. Using a qualitative comparative approach, we analyze the PEJ in the 2012 Draft Criminal Procedure Code and Australia’s committal hearings, drawing on statutes, scholarly articles, and related regulations. We find that although the 2025 draft Code did not adopt the PEJ, the concept remains relevant and worth implementing. The Preliminary Examining Judge can improve the efficiency of the legal system by supervising investigations and ensuring only well-founded cases proceed to court. Operating at the pre-investigation stage with broad powers to direct inquiries and name suspects, the PEJ reflects the inquisitorial civil law tradition. By contrast, Australia’s committal hearings occur post-investigation and assess the evidentiary sufficiency for higher courts, consistent with the common-law adversarial model.

Keywords

Collaboration network of the authors

40 authors · 103 co-authorship links · showing the 40 most connected

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • State University of Semarang
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Muhammad Azil MaskurAffiliation unknown4
Chandra Noviardy IrawanAffiliation unknown4
Benny SumardianaAffiliation unknown4
PujiyonoAffiliation unknown3
Anis WidyawatiAffiliation unknown3
Nur RochaetiAffiliation unknown3
Wildan Azkal FikriAffiliation unknown3
Yaris Adhial FajrinAffiliation unknown2
Umi Khaerah PatiAffiliation unknown2
Pranoto PranotoAffiliation unknown2
Kukuh TejomurtiAffiliation unknown2
Barda Nawawi AriefAffiliation unknown2
Ridwan ArifinAffiliation unknown2
Cahya WulandariState University of Semarang2
Firsta Rahadatul 'AisyAffiliation unknown2
Iradhad Taqwa SihidiAffiliation unknown1
Hutri AgustinoAffiliation unknown1
Dwi Ratna Indri HapsariAffiliation unknown1
Heri PurwantoAffiliation unknown1
Hatma Aditya JananuragaAffiliation unknown1
Muchlas Rastra SamaraAffiliation unknown1
Sumartini DewiAffiliation unknown1
Maria Silvya E. WanggaAffiliation unknown1
Rian SaputraAffiliation unknown1
Muhammad Khalif ArdiAffiliation unknown1
Sunny Ummul FirdausAffiliation unknown1
Riski Dysas PrabawaniAffiliation unknown1
Dodi RoikardiAffiliation unknown1
Bagus Hendradi KusumaAffiliation unknown1
Izan Mateo CassandroAffiliation unknown1
Ade AdhariAffiliation unknown1
Leony Sondang SuryaniAffiliation unknown1
Shidarta ShidartaAffiliation unknown1
Karsudin KarsudinAffiliation unknown1
Genjie OmpoyAffiliation unknown1
Nurul Natasha Binti Muhammad ZakiAffiliation unknown1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijcls/oai, first harvested 5 Nov 2026, last seen 5 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc) 
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en">Preliminary Examining Judges in Indonesian Criminal Procedure Reform: Lessons from Australia’s Committal Hearings</dc:title>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Kukuh Dwi Kurniawan</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Pujiyono, Pujiyono</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Irma Cahyaningtyas</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Hasnan Bachtiar</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Preliminary Examining Judge</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Criminal Procedure Law</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Committal Hearing</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Draft Criminal Procedure Code</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Protection of Human Rights</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en">This study examines Indonesia’s Preliminary Examining Judges (PEJ) and compares them with Australia’s committal hearings. We ask whether the PEJ can better protect human rights and prevent abuses of authority in Indonesia’s criminal justice system. Using a qualitative comparative approach, we analyze the PEJ in the 2012 Draft Criminal Procedure Code and Australia’s committal hearings, drawing on statutes, scholarly articles, and related regulations. We find that although the 2025 draft Code did not adopt the PEJ, the concept remains relevant and worth implementing. The Preliminary Examining Judge can improve the efficiency of the legal system by supervising investigations and ensuring only well-founded cases proceed to court. Operating at the pre-investigation stage with broad powers to direct inquiries and name suspects, the PEJ reflects the inquisitorial civil law tradition. By contrast, Australia’s committal hearings occur post-investigation and assess the evidentiary sufficiency for higher courts, consistent with the common-law adversarial model.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2026-05-04</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijcls/article/view/25017</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.15294/ijcls.v11i1.25017</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en">IJCLS (Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies); Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): Indonesia J. Crim. L. Studies (May, 2026); 175-212</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2548-1576</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2548-1568</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.15294/ijcls.v11i1</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/ijcls/article/view/25017/9531</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">Copyright (c) 2026 Kukuh Dwi Kurniawan, Pujiyono Pujiyono, Irma Cahyaningtyas, Hasnan Bachtiar (Author)</dc:rights>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>