33 2.
Each extension may not exceed 30 days. The maximum of extension according to Article 29 of KUHAP is 60 days.
3. The extension must be given gradually, 30 days of each extension. If the first 30 days is not
sufficient for the purpose of examination, then another extension may be given. 4.
It is still possible to release the suspecdefendant from the detention, which depends on th urgency of the examination and the detention. If the extension has expired in 60 days, then
the suspectdefendant must be released.
D.5. Extension in regards to the exclusion of detention period The extension of detention is given by the authorized official, depending on the level of examination.
The extension will be given after the request and report according to Article 29 3 of KUHAP:
1. During investigation and prosecution, the extension request is sent by the investigator and
prosecutor to the Chairman of District Court. 2.
During examination at the district court, the extension request is sent to the High Court and must be approved by the Chairman of the High Court..
3. During appeal process, the extension request is sent to the Supreme Court. However, it is
unclear whether such request must be approved by the Chief Justice. 4.
During cassation, the extension request must be approved by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
E. Mechanism on the objection against detention
An objection may be filed against an extension of detention according to Article 29 7 of KUHAP: 1.
If the extension is granted during investigation or prosecution, the authorized party to examine the legality of extension is the Chairman of the Hight Court.
2. If the extension is grandte during trial at the district court or high court, the complaint will
be examined by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court The implementation of the objection against an extension must refer to Article 29 7 of KUHAP
which states that:
1. Even though the docket has not been sent to the district court, the objection against the
legality of the detention during investigation or prosecution, may be filed to the Chairman of the High Court to be examined and decided.
2. Against an extension during cassation, may be challenged
3. The person that may file the objection is the suspect or defendant. It does not stipulate their
family or lawyer.
F. Transfer of detention
The limitation on the detention authority on each institution, will affect on the transfer of responsibility on the detention.
Such transfer aims to:
i Calculate the definitive detention period;
ii Determine when the detainee has been under illegal detention; and
iii Ease the related parties to know the whereabout of the detainee
The vagueness of detention transfer will violate the legal certainty under KUHAP
34 If the case of a person that the detention has been postponed is transferred from one institution to
another, there is a transfer of responsibility according to Point 8 g and h Appendix of the Minister of Justice Decree No. M. 14-PW. 07.031983.
F.1. The mechanism of transferring detention postponement from investigator to prosecutor If the docket has been sent to the prosecutor and the prosecutor viewed that it is complete, while
the suspe t s dete tio is postpo ed ith ail, the i estigato must consult with the prosecutor to consider the detention postponement during prosecution.
If the p ose uto ag ees ith the i estigato s ad ise to e d the postpo e e t, the i estigato ill issue a warrant to stop the postponement and followed-up up by a detention warrant issued by the
prosecutor However, if the prosecutor grants the postponement, it may be continued during prosecution phase.
If this happens, there must be a renewal on the postponement agreement. F.2. The mechanism of transferring detention postponement from prosecutor to the Chairman of
District Court The mechanism of transferring detention postponement from prosecutor to the Chairman of District
Court is stipulated under Point 8 h Appendix of the Minister of Justice Decree No. M.14- PW.07.031983:
1. If the prosecutor feels that the postponement is no longer needed during court examination
at the district court, the prosecutor must issue a warrant that terminate the postponement before the docket is sent to the district court.
2. If the prosecutor views that the detention postponement may be continued during court
examination, the prosecutor will file a request to the Chairman of the District Court. 3.
Chai a of the Dist i t Cou t a app o e o eje t the p ose uto s e uest. 4.
Rejection or approval must be written by the Chairman of the District Court. 5.
If the Chairman of the District Court rejected the request, the detention postponement is no longer valid.
35
CHAPTER IV Non-Custodial Alternative Measure
