New Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Code in Force: Three Supreme Court Circulars to Watch in Criminal Cases

On 2 January 2026, Indonesia entered a new phase of criminal law enforcement, as the new Criminal Code (KUHP) and the new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) came into effect. However, with some implementing regulations for the new KUHAP still outstanding, questions remain about how certain procedural rules should be applied in practice.

To provide further guidance, the Supreme Court issued three Supreme Court Circular Letters (Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung or SEMA) in August 2026. Although SEMAs are not statutory regulations, they provide guidance for judges in applying the law and can influence how criminal proceedings are handled in practice.

The following are the key points from these three SEMAs and their practical implications for criminal proceedings.

1. SEMA No. 4 of 2026 issued on 19 August 2026 Clarifies Legal Remedies Against Acquittals and Discharges

Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) No. 4 of 2026 aims to align the courts’ understanding of the legal remedies available against acquittals and discharges as well as of appeal and cassation requests that fail to meet formal requirements.

One of the most crucial points affirmed in SEMA No. 4 of 2026 concerns the legal standing of acquittals. Under SEMA No. 4 of 2026, an acquittal (vrijspraak) at district court cannot be appealed, either to the High Court or to the Supreme Court on cassation. In other words, when a court finds that the defendant did not commit the offense and sets them free, the case in principle ends there. 

This rule adapts criminal procedure to a modern approach that’s oriented toward protection of human rights and fair legal certainty. It reaffirms a basic principle of criminal procedure: when the public prosecutor’s indictment is not proven legally and convincingly at trial, the defendant’s liberty must be fully restored without the shadow of a protracted judicial process. Moreover, it sets out what happens after onslag van alle rechtsvervolging verdict (the judge decides that while the defendant did commit the act they were accused of, the act itself is not a crime under the law).  If defendant is still in detention, court must release them on the same day the judgment is read. If a legal remedy is filed afterward, the first-instance court no longer has authority over the defendant’s detention status. Additionally, the case can be appealed either to the High Court or to the Supreme Court.

For defendants and law enforcement alike, this gives clearer certainty about the legal effect of acquittals and discharges. 2. SEMA No. 3 of 2026 issued on 18 August 2026: Timing Is Key in Pretrial Motions

Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) No. 3 of 2026 clarifies how the timing of a pretrial motion affects the examination of a criminal case. A pretrial motion is a court application challenging the legality of certain actions taken during a criminal investigation or prosecution.

If the motion is filed before the case is transferred to court, the case may still be transferred. However, the court cannot examine the substance of the criminal case until a legally binding pretrial ruling has been issued, in accordance with the applicable rules.

Conversely, if the motion is filed after the case has been transferred to court, the examination of the main case may proceed. The pretrial motion will be declared inadmissible (niet ontvankelijke verklaard), meaning that the court will not consider it on its merits.

As a result, timing becomes critical. Anyone who wants to challenge the legality of an investigator’s or prosecutor’s action through a pretrial motion must pay close attention to when they file.

3. SEMA No. 2 of 2026: A New Way to Count the Cassation Deadline

Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) No. 2 of 2026 clarifies how the deadline for filing a cassation appeal in criminal cases is calculated under the new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP).

The most significant change is how the deadline is counted. In the past, practice often tied the deadline to the receipt of a copy of the judgment. However, SEMA No. 2 of 2026 states that the 14-day period to file cassation runs from the day the High Court’s judgment is read out.

This means the parties must monitor the date of the judgment carefully and prepare their next steps in advance. Miscalculating the deadline may result in losing the opportunity to challenge the judgment through cassation, which is a review by the Supreme Court of whether the lower court applied the law correctly.

What Does This Mean for Businesses and Parties in a Case?

First, procedural deadlines require closer attention. The timing of pretrial motions and the calculation of cassation deadlines can directly affect the legal options available to a party. Second, detention status requires careful consideration. The rules governing a defendant’s release following a discharge from all legal claims may affect their position immediately after judgment. Third, litigation strategies must adapt to the new KUHAP. Understanding how the courts apply the new rules is essential to making timely and informed procedural decisions.

Moreover, The new criminal code (KUHP) and criminal procedural code (KUHAP) mark an important change in Indonesia’s criminal justice system. While implementing regulations are still incomplete, SEMA Nos. 2, 3, and 4 of 2026 give an early idea of how the new rules will be applied in practice.

For companies, directors, management, and individuals who may face criminal proceedings, understanding these developments early can help protect their rights and inform their legal strategy.

Farida Law Office will continue to monitor regulatory developments and court practice concerning the implementation for the new KUHP and KUHAP. For further information or for a consultation on how these changes affect your circumstances or a criminal case you are facing, please contact Farida Law Office (corporatesecretary@faridalawoffice.com).