Dinamika Pengaturan Peninjauan Kembali Perkara Pidana dalam Sistem Hukum Nasional

Judicial review (Peninjauan Kembali/PK) as an extraordinary legal remedy in criminal cases has undergone significant normative developments within Indonesia’s legal system. Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (the former KUHAP) limited the submission of PK to only once, as stipulated in Article 268 paragraph (3), reflecting a strong orientation toward legal certainty. However, through Constitutional Court Decision Number 34/PUU-XI/2013, such limitation was declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, as it disregarded substantive justice. In practice, the Supreme Court, through Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 7 of 2014, continued to uphold the one-time limitation on PK, resulting in normative dualism and legal uncertainty, as well as conflicting with the principle of the hierarchy of laws and regulations. This study aims to analyze the development of PK regulation following the Constitutional Court’s decision and to examine how the provisions under Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (the new KUHAP) accommodate the decision and resolve the existing normative conflict. The research employs a normative legal method using statutory and conceptual approaches.The findings indicate that the new KUHAP has substantively adopted the principles emphasized by the Constitutional Court, namely by allowing multiple submissions of PK under certain conditions, such as the discovery of new evidence ((novum)) or conflicting final judgments. This regulation reflects a reaffirmation that substantive justice must take precedence over formal legal certainty. Furthermore, the reform of the KUHAP implicitly reinforces the legal standing of Supreme Court Circular Letters, affirming that they must not contradict statutory law as a higher norm. Therefore, the reform of the KUHAP represents a concrete legislative response to the Constitutional Court’s decision, as well as an effort to harmonize the legal system by eliminating normative dualism and reinforcing the hierarchy of laws and regulations in criminal justice practice.