Legal Problems Of Police Discretion Parameters In Patrol Activities To Prevent Street Crime

Abstract

The Police face a complex situation in the field when street patrols encounter a crime threat in which the Police must act quickly for the safety of the public and the safety of the Police officers themselves in the field. In positive law or legislation, other police actions are not mentioned in detail, but in their actions the police are limited by the law, becoming a dilemma for the police, on the one hand aiming to maintain public security and safety but on the other hand must still follow the direction of the law, so that the police's function changes into a merely positive function. The aim of this research is to determine and analyze (1) the legal validity of various police discretionary actions in the corridor of law enforcement, (2) the form of manifestation of police discretion in patrol activities to prevent street crime, (3) the legal problems of the parameters of police discretion in patrol activities to prevent street crime. The approach used in this research is normative juridical. The research specifications are descriptive and analytical. The data sources used are secondary data. Secondary data is data obtained from library research, consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. Based on the results of the research and discussion, it can be concluded: (1) Article 18 of Law Number 2 of 2002 concerning the Republic of Indonesia Police is the most appropriate article to represent the discretion of the Police. The wording in Article 18 which reads "act according to one's own judgment" refers to the concept of discretion or "Freies Ermessen". (2) The use of force that can be accounted for includes those in accordance with the Regulation of the Chief of Police Number 1 of 2009 concerning the Use of Force in Police Actions, namely from the deterrent effect, verbal orders, soft hand-to-hand control, hard hand-to-hand control, blunt weapon control, firearm control, which actions are part of the manifestation of Police discretion which in this case is functionalized in the implementation of Police Patrols as a representation of the goal of preventing street crime. (3) The quick calculation of Police members who are on patrol by disabling street crime perpetrators is overshadowed by accusations of human rights violations, extrajudicial killings, violating the principle of due process of law. This polarization of social paradigms has not infrequently created the growth of a dilemmatic attitude within Police members in facing threatening situations.