The investigate power criminal case under the 'Order' system.

Abstract

In order to set the criteria for the criminal justice procedures, the Criminal Procedure Code allows government officials a scope of duty and a certain power. This appoints the ‘police inquiry staff in charge’ as responsible for the investigation of offences in order to prosecute the case, summarize the case, and give an opinion as to whether to prosecute or not prosecute the accused, etc. This beginning of the judicial process is of great importance, but the truth is, the authority to investigate, gather evidence, summarize the case, give an the opinion to prosecute or not prosecute does not depend solely on the inquiry officer who is in charge of the case, but there is also influence from the supervisor or "The Big Boss" involved. This reduces the freedom of investigation by the investigating officer in charge. Part of this is due to the organizational structure with a military-like command system, and part of it comes from the legal culture of patronage systems within police organizations and from the cultivation of the consciousness of the police working in the organization. This consciousness has been passed from generation to generation until it is a system in which the subordinate investigators are in a state of surrender to the command system. This in turn affects the entire criminal justice system.

This article seeks to understand the perspective or "understanding" of law enforcement in the position of "inquiry officer in charge"' and "inquiry supervisor in charge" in collecting information for reports, or concluding whether to prosecute or not prosecute, etc. This is the source to understanding the heart of criminal law enforcement. How do we measure the independence of the inquiry officer or the control of the inspection from the supervisor? And how do we solve the problem of investigations that operate under the orders of "The Big Boss?"