Pre-trial was inspired by the habeas corpus institution, whose purpose is to provide legal protection for suspects against coercive measures against the law. This study aims to review whether pre-trial norms and practices are still consistent with the purpose of their establishment, namely, to provide legal protection for suspects. The method used in this study is normative juridical with statutory, case, historical and conceptual approaches. Based on the discussion and analysis, the results show that the pre-trial has not optimally provided legal protection for suspects from illegitimate coercive measures because there are pre-trial objects regarding the legitimacy of coercive measures, there are pre-trial objects regarding whether or not the termination of the investigation or prosecution is legal, third parties are allowed to submit a pre-trial, the determination of a suspect is not a coercive measure, the concept of compensation and rehabilitation contradicts the theory of state responsibility, and there is a time limit for filing compensation and rehabilitation.