The Meaning of Pro Justitia and Examples of Its Implementation

PERTANYAAN

What is the Meaning of Pro Justitia? Please explain. Thank you.

INTISARI JAWABAN

The term "pro justitia" means taking consideration of the law, for the law, or the legislation. The implementation of pro justitia can be found in court decisions, specifically in the head of the decision (in Bahasa Indonesia is known as irah-irah).

Apart from court decisions, pro justitia is also a formal requirement for various legal documents. What are these documents?

Please read the review below for a further explanation.

ULASAN LENGKAP

This article is an English translation of Arti Pro Justitia dan Contoh Penerapannya written by Nafiatul Munawaroh, S.H., M.H, and published on Friday, 7 July 2023.

This article is the second update of the article entitled What is Pro Justitia? written by Arif Maulana, S.H. and was first published on Monday, 23 December 2019, and first updated on Wednesday, 26 October 2022.

All legal information available on Klinik hukumonline.com has been prepared for educational purposes only and is general in nature (read the complete Disclaimer). In order to obtain legal advice specific to your case, please consult with Justika Partner Consultant.

What’s the Meaning of Pro Justitia?

According to Yan Pramadya Puspa in the book entitled Kamus Hukum: Edisi Lengkap Bahasa: Belanda-Indonesia-Inggris, pro justitia means taking consideration of the law (a.k.a. for the sake of the law), for the law, or legislation (p. 456).

In practice, the term pro justitia is found in official police documents or letters in the process of preliminary investigation and full investigation as well as legal documents of the prosecutor in the process of full investigation or prosecution for the benefit of the legal process.

The meaning of pro justitia can also be found in court decisions or judgments/stipulations. The term pro justitia in a stipulation or decision is written with the phrase "For the Righteousness of Justice on God Almighty” or in Bahasa Indonesia is known as “Demi Keadilan Berdasarkan Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa”.

Formal Administrative and Substantive Material Review

In formal administrative terms, the use of the phrase pro justitia is to indicate that the actions taken by law enforcement officials are legal actions that are legitimate and have binding legal force.

Materially substantive, based on legal documents that read "pro justitia", any legal action taken as per the letter is done in the interest of law enforcement and justice.

For example, in the Appendix to Chief of the Indonesian National Police Regulation  6/2010, it is explained that arrest warrants must specifically state "pro justitia" (p. 35).

According to our opinion, this example not only reflects a legal document for legal action in the interest of law and justice but also reflects the validity and binding force of an arrest warrant to restrict a person's freedom as defined by Article 1 number 20 Criminal Procedure Code, which reads:

An arrest is an investigator's action in the form of temporary restraint of the freedom of a suspect or defendant when there is sufficient evidence for the purpose of investigation or prosecution and/or trial in the cases and in the manner provided for in this law.

Implementation of Pro Justitia in Court Decisions

Referring to Article 197 section (1) letter a Criminal Procedure Code, a verdict letter must contain, among others, the head of the verdict which reads: "DEMI KEADILAN BERDASARKAN KETUHANAN YANG MAHA ESA".

It should also be noted that the provision of Article 197 section (1) KUHAP was ruled to be conditionally contrary to the 1945 Constitution and has no binding legal force to the extent that the phrase "the verdict of conviction contains" is not interpreted as "the verdict of conviction in the court of first instance contains" by the Constitutional Court based on Constitutional Court Decision No. 103/PUU-XIV/2016 (pp. 82 - 83).

If the head of the decision (in Bahasa Indonesia is known as irah-irah) "For the Righteousness of Justice on God Almighty" is not included, it will result in a null and void verdict.[1]

Furthermore, in the article Irah-Irah, Head of Decision that Means Oath, the historical perspective of the implementation of pro justitia in court decisions is explained.

The article reveals that in Indonesia, the sentence of “For the Righteousness of Justice on God Almighty” has been used at the head of the decision for a long time with several changes. In the same article, it was explained that Bismar Siregar in the Criminal Procedure Law noted that the head of the decision in Indonesian courts from pre-independence to independence had used "In the Name of the Queen/King", then "In the Name of the State", then "In the Name of Justice", and changed to "For the Righteousness of Justice on God Almighty", as it applies today.

The article also explains that Bismar Siregar was of the opinion that the sentence used in the head of the decision indicates to whom the court decision is accountable. If "In the Name of Justice", then it is to justice that the decision is accounted for. If it is "In the Name of God", then it is to God that the judge's accountability is addressed. "In the name of", according to Bismar, carries enormous moral obligations and responsibilities.

By attributing the decision to God, a judge has sought his best wisdom in the name of God in adjudicating and deciding cases.

Then, the article also explained that in Sudikno Mertokusumo's dissertation, the word ‘For the Righteousness’ in "For the Righteousness Justice Based on God Almighty", means ‘for the sake of/for the benefit of’. He believed that the phrase ‘for the sake of’ is more appropriate than ‘on behalf of’, because the purpose of a court is to achieve justice.

Therefore, justice itself is not carried out "in the name of justice", as if justice has delegated or authorized one body to carry out justice.

These are the answers we can provide, we hope you will find them useful.

Legal Basis:

1. The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia;
2. Law Number 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure Code;
3. Regulation of the Chief of the Indonesian National Police Number 6 of 2010 on the Investigation Management by Civil Servant Investigators.

Court Decision:

Constitutional Court Decision No. 103/PUU-XIV/2016

Reference:

Yan Pramadya Puspa. Kamus Hukum: Edisi Lengkap Bahasa: Belanda-Indonesia-Inggris. Semarang: CV Aneka Ilmu, 2008.

---

[1] Article 197 section (2) Law Number 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure Code.