Advocate Interaction With Clients In Providing Criminal Legal Aid In Jambi Region

Advocacy Interaction of the people to access justice in legal aid.

Advocate interaction with the client (community) to provide free legal aid in 11 (eleven) Jambi areas is still very less, not optimal to access justice especially in criminal cases. This is seen from the small number of legal aid acquisition that occurred in 5 (five) Regencies and 1 (one) city for 4 (four) years In the period of 2010-2014 the number of criminal cases that occurred are 6836 cases (six thousand eight hundred thirty six), the number that did not receive assistance are 5010 cases (five thousand ten) cases, at own cost of 1410 (one thousand four hundred and ten) cases, while cases that obtained free legal aid only 416 (four hundred and sixteen) cases. When looking at the legal aid figures above that most people cannot access justice for legal aid, let alone free aid, the number of cases of 6,836, only 416 cases receives prodeo legal aid or 4.84%. Next those who cannot get legal aid amounts to 5,010 cases or by 78.84%, while using their own cost of 1,410 or 16, 42% only.

Thus Advocate's interaction with clients to access justice is further away from what expectations that have been established by law. Actually legal aid term is often used as a translation of Legal aid and Legal Assistance. Legal Aid is more indicative to free legal aid to people who cannot afford, While Legal Assistance shows to the definition of legal aid as general (Harahap, 1998).

The principles of Legal Aid not yet implemented as provided for Law No. 16 of 2011 and those contained in the Conference II of Law Asia of 1973 which provide protection for the right of individuals to obtain legal aid, especially in achieving justice in criminal cases in Jambi, according to Clarence J . Dias, that the "legal service" of all forms of giving by professionals to audiences in society with a view to ensuring that no one in the community’s right to legal assistance / counsel is denied because it lacks sufficient financial resources (Harahap, 1998).

Access to justice is not yet actualized in legal aid as guaranteed by the law, the justice-enforcement program as stated by Jhon Rawl, that a democratic justice enforcement program should pay attention to two principles of justice: firstly, giving equal rights and opportunities to the widest basic freedoms extent of equal freedom for everyone. The second is able to reorganize the socio-economic disparities that occur so to provide mutual benefits for everyone both those from the lucky and disadvantaged community. (Rawls, 2006)

The same treatment intended by Jhon Rawl is related to the human dignity which is the basic right for every individual, then there is the supervision effort in applying all the provisions on legal aid and revising the legal policy, in accordance with the concept of law-making desire which is coordinated with sila The Second and The Fifth precept of Pancasila.

Advocate interaction with clients in the implementation of legal aid rights pro deo by law enforcement

When viewed from the legal aspects that regulate the provision of legal aid, could not provide the right for every individual to access justice for those who cannot afford, especially in the region of Jambi, according to the author's opinion are due to:

• The enforcement of the law shall always be guided by the technical guidelines issued by their respective institutions, regardless of the rights of the suspect / defendant as provided in the law on legal aid.

• Lack of socialization of legal aid free of charge by policy makers, in this case is the government.

• The Government does not estimate the supply of legal aid funds that adjusted to the number of criminal cases occurring in each year.

• Weaknesses in the legal provisions relating to the implementation of legal aid have not been made any remedial efforts.

• Most communities involved in criminal cases do not understand that the law has protected its constitutional rights.

The five factors above in the observation of the author is still often done by law enforcers in the criminal process so that it would be difficult to manifest justice in the implementation of legal aid services, especially in the provision of legal assistance is not optimal enough for the needs of justice seekers, because law enforcement is always guided by the law. While the law is a procedural administrative instrument unrelated to the definition of crime, speaking of crime means talk about substance, whereas talk about law means talk about procedural, could it be that the substance was defeated by the procedure (Waluyadi, 2009)

Furthermore, in taking the policy to form a Law should always be based on the value of Pancasila, because Pancasila is the heart of national defense of the Indonesia (Atmasasmita, 2014) to establish the legal character worth of Pancasila is the duty and responsibility to restore the clock of the legal history of Indonesia. Legal characters worth of Pancasila is to manifest the justice that is expected trickle equally to the low-income citizen of Indonesia.

Based on such thoughts, it can be said that the benchmark of criminal policy should be based on the legal system of the state based on Pancasila. From a legal perspective, Pancasila becomes a legal ideal that should be made as the basic of the objectives of every Indonesian law. Therefore, each consistency of content from the top to the lowest hierarchy, in such position is associated with the politics of legal development, the Pancasila which is intended as the basic for achieving the country's goal has resulted in the rule of law that is (Taufik, 2014).

• Laws made in Indonesia should aim to build and ensure the integrity of the state and nation of Indonesia both theoretically and ideologically.

• Laws made in Indonesia must be based on democracy and nomocracy at the same time;

• Laws made in Indonesia should be aimed to build social justice for all Indonesians.

• Laws made in Indonesia must be based on a credible religious message of law that does not privilege or discriminate certain groups based on the size of the religion.

The number of accredited Advocates is not balanced by the number of Cases.

Decree of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights number M.HH-01.HN.03.03 dated 7th January 2016, on the result for Jambi region accreditation, a number of 10 Legal Aid organizations, with an average value of C, For the value of accreditation / confirmation C one of the requirements is, the number of cases handled in 1 (one) year at least 10 cases including civil, criminal and state administration, while cases that occurred in Jambi region amounted to 6. 836 cases. There are still many justice seeker community cannot access justice to get legal aid prodeo on policy which have been made by government.

With the limited legal aid organization accredited by the government, this is not in line with the objectives of legal aid as set forth in Article 9 of Law No. 16 of 2011, since the existence of the Legal Aid Organization are quite a lot and has a wide range of orientations. The existence of LAO is related to three factors, namely; The integrity of the organization, the effectiveness of professional ethics and the ethos of its law enforcement (Alkotsar, 2010) without these three factors, it would be difficult to have an intense relationship between Advocate and clients especially on criminal cases. The intense relationship between the community and Advocate. To gain access to justice is a principle of equal status before the law, even though the citizen who has committed a disgraceful Law, his rights as a citizen are not erased or lost (Tahir, 2010). Therefore in the law enforcement process must be coordinated between law in the book and law in action, because law enforcement is basically a gap between the law in writing and the actual law.

The free Legal Aid allocation is too small

When viewed from the allocation of legal aid funds free of charge in 2015 for Jambi region is only Rp 379,000,000, - equivalent to 116,615 RM. While the number of criminal cases that occurred in 2015 for the Jambi region amounted to 1,757 cases then compared with the funds provided with the number of criminal cases is certainly all criminal cases that occur cannot be accompanied by advocate. To obtain legal aid free of charge, make an estimate based on the decision of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights number HN 03.03.2014 for one case estimated at Rp 5000.000, - (five million Rupiah), if shared with the free legal aid allocation by 2015. Amounting to 379,000,000.- (three hundred seventy-nine million) the number of custody that can be handled is only 75.8 criminal cases while the case in 2015 amounts to 1,757 cases, thus the allocation of free legal aid funds is too small when compared to the amount cases that occur for one year.

The funds that too small provided by the government will be difficult for people who are less capable to access justice, because the high tariffs of legal counsel that will not be able to be paid by the seeker of justice. Justice is sold but most people will agree that in a just society, justice should not be sold at all (Friedman, 2001). Therefore the state is obliged to provide free legal counsel to anyone suspected of crimes that unable to pay for itself.

Bureaucracy disbursement process takes too long.

The disbursement of legal aid funds free of charge in Jambi was conducted by legal aid organizations after the cases in which they had adjacent has permanent (Inkrach) decisions, this was in accordance with the provisions that was done through a process of phase, which had approximately 1 (one ) month. If the payment cannot be implemented in the current year it will be proposed in the next year, this is because the decision process at the trial takes too long (HAM), 2015).

The bureaucratic process of disbursement of old legal aid funds will have implications for the provision of prodeo legal aid assistance; this is one of the reluctance factors for advocate to interact with the less fortunate. In practice, the right to get legal aid, especially with the free of charge is still the rhetoric of the political elite and not to the level of practice (Nurdin, 2012). This is very contradictory to what has been regulated in law, because in reality the Advocates vying to provide legal assistance to upper middle class society. While the state guarantees the right of every citizen, stating that the state is obliged to provide legal aid to the citizen who cannot afford. Legal aid from the state is not compassion but is a rights of everyone. Therefore, the state is required greater responsibility to carry out such legal assistance in the form of provision of facilities, adequate funds and revisions to simplify the process of disbursement of prodeo legal aid funds.

Local regulations regarding free legal aid has been set

Each region is expected to make a policy of issuing local regulations to allocate legal aid funds for free, since the allocation of legal aid funds provided by the central government is limited and relatively small, however only a small proportion of the provinces as well as districts cities across Indonesia have budgeted legal aid funds for the poor. Due to several reasons, among others; This is not a priority scale for the regions, limited funds available in the Regional Revenue Budget (APBD), local revenues between regions are vary (unequal), the region assumes that this fund has been estimated by the center government.

Actually, the mandate of the higher Act has given the opportunity for the regions to make the formation of local regulations, as the task of assisting this matter as regulated in the Act number 12 of 2011 on the formulation of legislation. In connection with the establishment of local regulations on legal aid free of charge, this is not contrary to higher law and is not a false policy, especially when seen in some areas has created a legal aid budget with its legal umbrella is a local regulation..