Legal Literacy – Obstruction of justice is an act of threatening, influencing, and obstructing ongoing legal proceedings.

In Indonesia, this action often occurs in various cases, especially among officials and the police.

This article discusses in detail about obstruction of justice starting from the definition, elements, position, to examples of cases.

Definition Obstruction of Justice

Obstruction of justice is an action aimed at obstructing the legal process.

This term is a legal terminology derived from Anglo-Saxon literature. In the doctrine of criminal law in Indonesia, the term is often translated as "criminal act of obstructing the legal process."

According to Legal Dictionary, the meaning of obstruction of justice is:

“an attempt to interfere with the administration of the courts, the judicial system or law enforcement officers, including threatening witnesses, improper conversations with jurors, hiding evidence, or interfering with an arrest. Such activity is a crime.”

If interpreted in a free Indonesian translation, the term is an attempt to interfere with the administration of the court, the judicial system or law enforcement officials, including threatening witnesses, improper conversations with jurors, hiding evidence, or interfering with an arrest. This activity is a crime.

Meanwhile, Black’s Law Dictionary formulates obstruction of justice as follows:

“Interfacewith the orderly administration of law and justice, as by giving false information to or withholding evidence from a police officer or prosecutor, or by harming or intimidating a witness or juror”.

In this case, the definition in Black's Law Dictionary is considered more specific because it relates to the administration of law and justice . The term is defined as an act of obstructing the legal process and all forms of intervention in the entire legal process and justice, from the beginning to the end of the process.

Forms of intervention can include providing false information, concealing evidence from the police or prosecutors, and harming and intimidating witnesses and jurors (the use of jurors in Anglo-Saxon procedural law).

Meanwhile, Oemar Seno Adji and Indriyanto Seno Adji in Peradilan Bebas Negara Hukum dan Contempt of Court define obstruction of justice as an action that is intended or has the effect of distorting the legal process, as well as disrupting the functions that should be in a judicial process.

This act is considered a form of criminal act because it hinders law enforcement and damages the image of law enforcement agencies. Therefore, this action is categorized as a type of criminal act contempt of court or contempt of court.

Elements Obstruction of Justice

There are three elements of actions that are subject to criminal penalties obstruction of justicenamely:

  1. The act causes a delay in the legal process (pending judicial proceedings)
  2. The perpetrator knows his actions or is aware of his actions (knowledge of pending proceedings)
  3. The perpetrator commits or attempts to commit deviant acts with the aim of disrupting or interfering with the legal process or administration (acting corruptly with intent).

In some jurisdictions in America, there is an additional requirement for sentencing obstruction of justice, namely that the perpetrator must be proven to have a motive, such as a motive to be free from charges, a motive to reduce their sentence, and others.

Criminal act Obstruction of Justice in the Investigation Process

Forms of Obstruction of Justice in the Investigation Process

  1. The suspect intentionally hides and/or destroys evidence before or after the investigation process begins.
  2. The suspect intentionally avoids the investigation process with the aim of delaying time. A third party intentionally helps commit and/or facilitates the escape process of a criminal suspect.
  3. Bribing law enforcement officials and/or government officials not to continue the legal process and close the case.

Form Obstruction of Justice in the Prosecution Process

  1. During the investigation process, the defendant lied and intentionally removed evidence, which hindered the pre-prosecution process because the police were considered to have insufficient evidence.
  2. Committing a criminal act that is fraught with efforts to thwart the transfer of case files to the Prosecutor's Office.

Form Obstruction of Justice in the Trial Process

  1. The defendant intentionally harms himself before or after the trial process takes place.
  2. The defendant remains silent and lies when the judge asks questions.
  3. Expert witnesses and/or interpreters in this case provide misleading information or statements regarding the material and theory presented.
  4. Advocates intentionally make false statements and lies to protect the defendant, which is considered a violation of the law.

Case example Obstruction of Justice

The following are some examples of obstruction of justice cases that have occurred in Indonesia:

Anggo Widjojo Case

When the trial process was carried out in the case with the defendant Anggodo Widjojo in 2010, the defendant suddenly complained of pain in the head and pain throughout his body, so the defendant stated that he was unable to continue the trial. However, after the doctor examined the defendant's health condition, he was in normal and good condition. In this case, pretending to be sick is the easiest way to avoid legal proceedings because people who are presented in a sick state cannot be investigated, prosecuted or examined in court.

Setya Novanto Case

The second case is the E-KTP (Electronic Identity Card) procurement project involving the former Chairman of the House of Representatives (DPR-RI) Setya Novanto. During the investigation process, the suspect repeatedly refused to attend summons for examination from the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) on the grounds of illness.

In addition, after a forced attempt was made, the suspect again avoided KPK officers who wanted to make an arrest, until many dramas were played out so that Setya Novanto tried to escape the clutches of the law.

Indra Kenz Case

In this case, selebgram Indra Kenz, who is a suspect in the Binomo case, removed evidence of the case that ensnared him. The evidence that Indra Kenz removed was his cellphone, including a computer that allegedly stored data on his communication with Binomo or other affiliates. Not only did he remove evidence, Indra Kenz was also indicated to have transferred money in his account so that investigators only found money with a nominal value of IDR 1.8 billion in his account. During the investigation process, Indra Kenz also showed an uncooperative attitude, such as covering up who the owner or mastermind of the Binimo application was. Including refusing to be called a Binomo affiliate.

Position Obstruction of Justice in Positive Criminal Law in Indonesia

Obstruction of justice constitutes a prohibited act that contains criminal sanctions. The legal basis obstruction of justice is explained in Article 21 of Law Number 31 of 1999 Concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes which states that,

“Anyone who intentionally prevents, obstructs, or thwarts directly or indirectly the investigation, prosecution, and examination in court against suspects and defendants or witnesses in corruption cases, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a minimum of three years and a maximum of twelve years and or a fine of at least Rp150 million and a maximum of Rp600 million.”

That is the description regarding obstruction of justice starting from the definition, elements, position, forms, to examples of cases in Indonesia.