Urgency of Exclusionary Rules Regulation in Indonesian Criminal Justice System

This research departs from the legal gap related to the application of the Exclusionary Rules of Evidence principle in Indonesia. Currently, there is no explicit regulation that prohibits the use of evidence obtained illegally, such as through torture, threats, or pressure on suspects. This kind of practice is often carried out by law enforcement officials to obtain a confession from a suspect and continue the case to trial. Without a clear legal mechanism, illegal evidence is often used, which not only harms the rights of suspects, but also undermines the principles of justice, weakens legal protection, and damages the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the public. This legal vacuum results in human rights violations continuing to occur without strict sanctions against the perpetrators of violations. This research uses a normative legal method with statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. Analysis is conducted through systematic and grammatical interpretation of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The results show the urgency of regulating the Exclusionary Rules principle in KUHAP to ensure that only legally obtained evidence can be used in court. As a regulatory model, Indonesia can adopt the provisions of Article 359a paragraph (1) letter b of the Dutch Wetboek van Strafvordering (WvSv), which provides an explicit mechanism to exclude illegal evidence. The implementation of this principle will strengthen the protection of human rights, ensure a fair trial process, and increase the accountability and professionalism of law enforcement officers in carrying out their duties.