URGENSI PERUBAHAN PENGATURAN ORGANISASI ADVOKAT UNTUK MEWUJUDKAN FUNGSI HUKUM

Robert L Simanungkalit; Appe Hutauruk; Mardiman Sane; Sunarno

doi:10.56301/csj.v9i1.2356

Robert L Simanungkalit Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Mpu Tantular, Jakarta, Indonesia
Appe Hutauruk Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Mpu Tantular, Jakarta, Indonesia
Mardiman Sane Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Mpu Tantular, Jakarta, Indonesia
Sunarno Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Mpu Tantular, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.56301/csj.v9i1.2356

Keywords: Advocate Organization, Criminal Procedure Code, Legal Reconstruction, Multi-Bar System, National Criminal Code

Abstract

The enactment of the National Criminal Code under Law Number 1 of 2023 and the Criminal Procedure Code under Law Number 20 of 2025 marks a major reform of Indonesia's criminal justice system by reinforcing the position of advocates as equal law enforcement officers. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of these reforms is constrained by the fragmented structure of advocate organizations, which creates inconsistencies in professional standards, ethical enforcement, legal education, and institutional accountability. This study examines the urgency of reconstructing the regulation of advocate organizations to support the implementation of advocates' functions within the new criminal justice framework and proposes an institutional model that promotes professionalism, integrity, and legal certainty. The research applies a socio-legal approach with a dominant normative juridical method through library research, utilizing legislation, court decisions, books, and scientific journals as primary and secondary legal materials. The findings indicate that the current multi-bar system weakens professional standardization and ethical supervision, thereby reducing advocates' effectiveness in fulfilling their constitutional role. The study concludes that regulatory reconstruction is essential through an integrated institutional framework that standardizes professional education, strengthens ethical enforcement, and improves supervision while respecting the constitutional freedom of association. Such reform is expected to reinforce the advocate profession as an officium nobile and enhance justice, legal certainty, and the effectiveness of Indonesia's criminal justice system.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bongso, J., RAS, H., & Suhardini, E. D. (2025). Legal reconstruction of the fragmentation of the professional advocate organization and its implications for law enforcement. Law Development Journal. https://jurnal.unissula.ac.id/index.php/ldj/article/view/52213

Danialsyah, S. D. (2021). Kedudukan advokat terhadap klien dalam mendampingi pemeriksaan perkara pidana di tingkat penyidikan. Jurnal Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan Al-Hikmah.

Firmansyah, A. H. (2022). Problematika Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 35/PUU-XVI/2018 tentang pengaturan organisasi advokat terkait kepastian hukum advokat di Indonesia. Novum: Jurnal Hukum, Universitas Negeri Surabaya.

Hidayah, E. N., Permatasari, M., & Lubis, F. (2023). Pemahaman dan pengaturan peran organisasi advokat di Indonesia dalam UU Nomor 18 Tahun 2003 tentang Advokat. As-Syar'i: Jurnal Bimbingan & Konseling Keluarga, 5(3). https://journal-laaroiba.com/ojs/index.php/as/article/view/254

Majelis: Jurnal Hukum Indonesia. (2025). Dewan Advokat Nasional sebagai solusi fragmentasi organisasi advokat. https://ejournal.appihi.or.id/index.php/Majelis/article/view/1324

Marzuki, P. M. (2021). Penelitian Hukum (Edisi Revisi). Jakarta: Kencana.

Pramono, A. (2016). Etika profesi advokat sebagai upaya pengawasan dalam menjalankan fungsi advokat sebagai penegak hukum. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum.

Prayudi, M., Sampara, S., & Qamar, N. (2020). Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor 35/PUU-XVI/2018 tentang organisasi advokat. Journal of Lex Generalis. https://www.pasca-umi.ac.id/index.php/jlg/article/view/280

Samo, S. S. M. (2017). Organisasi advokat dan urgensi peran pemerintah dalam profesi advokat. Jurnal Konstitusi, 14(3), 511–530. https://jurnalkonstitusi.mkri.id/index.php/jk/article/view/1433

Selly, G. (2025). Comparison of laws regulation of professional organizations of advocates in Indonesia and Malaysia. Constitutional Law Society, 4(1), 56–72. https://cls.ubl.ac.id/index.php/jcls/article/view/98

Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2019). Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.

Sugiyono. (2018). Analisis yuridis empiris SEMA Nomor 73/KMA/HK.01/IX/2015 terhadap perpecahan PERADI sebagai wadah tunggal organisasi advokat dalam sistem peradilan di Indonesia. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum.

Suhayati, M. (2015). Pengaturan sistem organisasi advokat dalam Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Perubahan Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2003 tentang Advokat. Kajian, 20(2). https://jurnal.dpr.go.id/index.php/kajian/article/view/632

Sudarmono. (2020). Makna wadah tunggal organisasi profesi advokat ditinjau dari Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2003 tentang Advokat. Jurnal Esensi Hukum.

Syarief, V. G. (2023). Kedudukan organisasi advokat dalam sistem kekuasaan kehakiman. Jurnal Ilmiah Publika, 11(1). https://jurnal.ugj.ac.id/index.php/Publika/article/view/8200

Yolanda, D. L. B. V. (2023). Penerapan single bar sistem dalam Rancangan Undang-Undang Advokat pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Equitable, Universitas Muhammadiyah Riau.