Justice Collaborator

Today’s crime dimensions are increasingly complex, both in terms of intensity and evolving modus operandi. In overcoming surging sophisticated crime, exceptionally organised crime involving more than one perpetrator, a concept in law enforcement is introduced: the justice collaborator. This concept has been regulated by multiple international conventions and applied in several countries. Historically, the primary aim of implementing this justice collaborator has been to dismantle larger criminal organisations and identify the principal perpetrators of organised crime. A justice collaborator is a cooperating witness or a witness who is also a perpetrator of a criminal act, who is willing to assist law enforcement officials to disclose a criminal act or the occurrence of a criminal act to return assets or proceeds of a criminal act to the state by providing information to law enforcement officials and providing testimony in the judicial process. The basic concept of implementing a cooperating perpetrator (justice collaborator) is for a non-main perpetrator to cooperate with law enforcement to capture the main perpetrator, thereby dismantling organised crime. In the 1970s, the first step for the United States government was to implement protection for cooperating and well-intentioned perpetrators in exterminating and dismantling crimes involving many people and organised. In Indonesia, the term justice collaborator was not initially recognised; instead, the term saksi mahkota (crown witness) was used, which has a similar definition. The term saksi mahkota was actually born from the practice development of Article 142 of the Indonesian Code of Criminal Procedure, with reference to case separation by the public prosecutor (splitting), which contains: “If the public prosecutor obtains a dossier containing multiple criminal acts committed by various suspects that are not covered by Article 141, the public prosecutor may prosecute each Defendant separately.” The practice of splitting cases among prosecutors for several perpetrators is due to a lack of witnesses. However, the term “crown witness”, used in the Indonesian judicial system, appears in court decisions, namely Supreme Court Decision No. 2437 K/Pid.Sus/2011, which explains the concept of crown witnesses as follows. “Although there is no authentic definition in the Criminal Procedure Code regarding Crown Witness (kroongetuide), based on an empirical perspective, a Crown Witness is defined as a Witness who comes from or is taken from one of the suspects or other Defendants who together committed a criminal act, and in which case the Witness is given a crown. The crown given to the Witness, who is the Defendant, is either the elimination of prosecution in his case, a very light charge if his case is transferred to the Court, or forgiveness for the mistakes that have been made.” As opposed to crown witnesses, justice collaborators are not recognised in the Criminal Procedure Code; their provisions are found deployed in several regulations outside the Criminal Procedure Code, as follows: Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) Number 04 of 2011 concerning Treatment for Criminal Reporters (Whistleblowers) and Witnesses Who Collaborate (Justice Collaborators) in Certain Criminal Cases. Joint Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia, Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia, The Chief of the National Police of the Republic of Indonesia, The Corruption Eradication Commission of the Republic of Indonesia, and Chairman of the Witness and Victim Protection Agency of the Republic of Indonesia, Number M.HH- 11.HM.03.02.th.2011, Number PER045/A/JA/12/2011, Number 1 of 2011, Number KEPB-02/01-55/12/2011, Number 4 of 2011 concerning Protection for Reporters, Reporting Witnesses, and Collaborating Perpetrator Witnesses. Law Number 31 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 13 of 2006 concerning Protection of Witnesses and Victims. Government Regulation (PP) Number 24 of 2025 regulates Justice Collaborators (JC). Although it has been regulated in several legitimate provisions, the application of the concept of justice collaborator in handling a case still increases problems, starting from the qualifications of a person who will be given justice collaborator status, the form of protection and appreciation given to justice collaborators at each stage of the case by authorised officials and other technical matters that are still unclear. In line with this, Abdul Haris Semendawai, the chairman of LPSK for the period 2013–2018, noted that many differences of opinion remain regarding who may be designated as a justice collaborator, as the regulations are numerous and their application remains divergent. Therefore, based on the above, it is compelling to study and discuss these problems in a journal entitled “Justice Collaborator: Its Regulations and Its Implementation in the Indonesian Judicial System”.