Defisit Operasionalisasi Proporsionalitas dalam Pengamanan VVIP oleh Kepolisian Daerah Pasca UU kepolisian 2026

Wisnu Pamungkas; Haidan Angga Kusumah

doi:10.62383/hukum.v3i4.1188

Authors

Wisnu Pamungkas Universitas Muhammadiyah Sukabumi
Haidan Angga Kusumah Universitas Muhammadiyah Sukabumi

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62383/hukum.v3i4.1188

Keywords:

Human Rights, Police Authority, Proportionality, Use of Force, VVIP Security

Abstract

VVIP security brings together the state's obligation to protect top officials with restrictions on citizens' rights through road closures, inspections, expulsions, and the use of force. Amendments to the Police Law in 2026 demand a critical re-examination of operational legality and proportionality. This article analyzes the adequacy of the legal basis for VVIP security by the regional police and formulates measurable, proportional, accountable, and human rights-oriented operational standards. The research uses a normative legal design enriched by sociolegal evidence through purposive interviews with the leadership of Dit Samapta, the Head of the VIP Sub-Directorate, the head of the unit, and implementing personnel. The analysis was carried out by vertical synchronization, systematic interpretation, three-stage proportionality test, and triangulation between sources and between levels of positions. The results of the study show that the institutional authority of the National Police is available, but the authority of action has not been translated into special procedures regarding road closures, preventive checks, crowd handling, force escalation, and reporting. Six gaps were identified: authority basis, road procedures, power stages, threat assessment, respect for rights, and accountability. The changes to the law strengthen the principles of proportionality, transparency, and supervision, but have not yet provided a matrix of operational decisions. This article offers a documented proportionality model that links legal mandates, threat levels, least mitigated alternatives, impact balance, and audit footprint as a series of VVIP security decisions of Indonesian regional police.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aleksanyan, A. (2024). Features of the implementation of the principle of proportionality in the use of force. Bulletin of Yerevan University C: Jurisprudence, 15(1), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU:C/2024.15.1.091

Andersen, J. P., & Gustafsberg, H. (2016). A training method to improve police use of force decision making: A randomized controlled trial. SAGE Open, 6(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016638708

Antrobus, E., Thompson, I., & Ariel, B. (2019). Procedural justice training for police recruits: Results of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15(1), 29–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-018-9331-9

Bennell, C., Blaskovits, B., Jenkins, B., Semple, T., Khanizadeh, A.-J., Brown, A. S., & Jones, N. J. (2021). Promising practices for de-escalation and use-of-force training in the police setting: A narrative review. Policing: An International Journal, 44(3), 377–404. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-06-2020-0092

Bond, C. E., Murphy, K., & Porter, L. E. (2015). Procedural justice in policing: The first phase of an Australian longitudinal study of officer attitudes and intentions. Crime, Law and Social Change, 64(4–5), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-015-9587-1

Bottoms, A., & Tankebe, J. (2012). Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 102(1), 119–170.

Bradford, B., Jackson, J., & Stanko, E. A. (2009). Contact and confidence: Revisiting the impact of public encounters with the police. Policing and Society, 19(1), 20–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439460802457594

Bradford, B., Quinton, P., Myhill, A., & Porter, G. (2014). Why do "the law" comply? Procedural justice, group identification and officer motivation in police organizations. European Journal of Criminology, 11(1), 110–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370813491898

Cyr, K. (2016). Police use of force: Assessing necessity and proportionality. Alberta Law Review, 53(3), 663–679. https://doi.org/10.29173/alr424

Engel, R. S., Corsaro, N., Isaza, G. T., & McManus, H. D. (2022). Assessing the impact of de-escalation training on police behavior: Reducing police use of force in the Louisville, KY Metro Police Department. Criminology & Public Policy, 21(2), 199–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12574

Engel, R. S., McManus, H. D., & Herold, T. D. (2020). Does de-escalation training work? A systematic review and call for evidence in police use-of-force reform. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 721–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12467

Giacomantonio, C., Goodwin, S., & Carmichael, G. (2020). Learning to de-escalate: Evaluating the behavioural impact of Verbal Judo training on police constables. Police Practice and Research, 21(4), 401–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2019.1589472

Gill, C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C. W., Vitter, Z., & Bennett, T. (2014). Community-oriented policing to reduce crime, disorder and fear and increase satisfaction and legitimacy among citizens: A systematic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10(4), 399–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-014-9210-y

Hinds, L., & Murphy, K. (2007). Public satisfaction with police: Using procedural justice to improve police legitimacy. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 40(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1375/acri.40.1.27

Indonesia. (1945). Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

Indonesia. (1999). Undang-Undang Nomor 39 Tahun 1999 tentang Hak Asasi Manusia.

Indonesia. (2002). Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2002 tentang Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia.

Indonesia. (2013). Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 59 Tahun 2013 tentang Pengamanan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden, Mantan Presiden dan Mantan Wakil Presiden beserta Keluarganya serta Tamu Negara Setingkat Kepala Negara/Kepala Pemerintahan.

Indonesia. (2026). Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 2026 tentang Perubahan Ketiga atas Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2002 tentang Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia.

Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Myhill, A., Quinton, P., & Tyler, T. R. (2012). Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. British Journal of Criminology, 52(6), 1051–1071. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azs032

Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. (2009a). Peraturan Kepala Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penggunaan Kekuatan dalam Tindakan Kepolisian.

Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. (2009b). Peraturan Kepala Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2009 tentang Implementasi Prinsip dan Standar Hak Asasi Manusia dalam Penyelenggaraan Tugas Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia.

Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. (2022). Peraturan Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 7 Tahun 2022 tentang Kode Etik Profesi dan Komisi Kode Etik Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia.

Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. (2024). Peraturan Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2024 tentang Pengelolaan Pengaduan Masyarakat di Lingkungan Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia.

Kochel, T. R., Parks, R., & Mastrofski, S. D. (2013). Examining police effectiveness as a precursor to legitimacy and cooperation with police. Justice Quarterly, 30(5), 895–925. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2011.633544

Lum, C., Stoltz, M., Koper, C. S., & Scherer, J. A. (2019). Research on body-worn cameras: What we know, what we need to know. Criminology & Public Policy, 18(1), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12412

Mastrofski, S. D., Snipes, J. B., & Supina, A. E. (1996). Compliance on demand: The public's response to specific police requests. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 33(3), 269–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427896033003001

Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Bennett, S., & Tyler, T. R. (2013). Shaping citizen perceptions of police legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural justice. Criminology, 51(1), 33–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2012.00289.x

Murphy, K., Mazerolle, L., & Bennett, S. (2014). Promoting trust in police: Findings from a randomised experimental field trial of procedural justice policing. Policing and Society, 24(4), 405–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2013.862246

Nam, Y., Wolfe, S. E., & Nix, J. (2024). Does procedural justice reduce the harmful effects of perceived ineffectiveness on police legitimacy? Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 61(1), 124–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224278221121622

Nix, J., Wolfe, S. E., Rojek, J., & Kaminski, R. J. (2015). Trust in the police: The influence of procedural justice and perceived collective efficacy. Crime & Delinquency, 61(4), 610–640. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128714530548

Owens, E., Weisburd, D., Amendola, K. L., & Alpert, G. P. (2018). Can you build a better cop? Experimental evidence on supervision, training, and policing in the community. Criminology & Public Policy, 17(1), 41–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12337

Pyo, J., Marteache, N., & Maxfield, M. G. (2026). Examining the links between procedural justice, bounded authority, and legitimacy in video-recorded police encounters. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 53(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548251368977

Raharjo, A., & Angkasa. (2011). Profesionalisme polisi dalam penegakan hukum. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, 11(3), 389–401.

Revaldi, M., & Yasarman. (2025). The principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality in the use of force by the police: A review of Police Chief Regulation No. 1 of 2009. Decisio: Law Journal, 2(1), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.52249/decisio.v2i1.25

Rockwell, A. R., Bishopp, S. A., & Orrick, E. A. (2021). Do policy and training changes influence patterns of police use of force? An interrupted time-series analysis. Policing: An International Journal, 44(3), 469–482. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-07-2020-0128

Rosenbaum, D. P., & Lawrence, D. S. (2017). Teaching procedural justice and communication skills during police-community encounters: Results of a randomized control trial with police recruits. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 13(3), 293–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-017-9293-3

Sahin, N. M., Braga, A. A., Apel, R., & Brunson, R. K. (2017). The impact of procedurally just policing on citizen perceptions of police during traffic stops: The Adana randomized controlled trial. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 33(4), 701–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-016-9308-7

Sherman, L. W. (2018). Reducing fatal police shootings as system crashes: Research, theory, and practice. Annual Review of Criminology, 1, 421–449. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092409

Tankebe, J. (2013). Viewing things differently: The dimensions of public perceptions of police legitimacy. Criminology, 51(1), 103–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2012.00291.x

Terrill, W., & Paoline, E. A., III. (2017). Police use of less lethal force: Does administrative policy matter? Justice Quarterly, 34(2), 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2016.1147593

Todak, N., & James, L. (2018). A systematic social observation study of police de-escalation tactics. Police Quarterly, 21(4), 509–543. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611118784007

Tyler, T. R. (2004). Enhancing police legitimacy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 593(1), 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203262627

Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015). The impact of psychological science on policing in the United States: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and effective law enforcement. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16(3), 75–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615617791

White, M. D., Mora, V. J., Orosco, C., & Hedberg, E. C. (2021). Moving the needle: Can training alter officer perceptions and use of de-escalation? Policing: An International Journal, 44(3), 418–436. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-08-2020-0140

Wood, G., Tyler, T. R., & Papachristos, A. V. (2020). Procedural justice training reduces police use of force and complaints against officers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(18), 9815–9821. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920671117