Rechtsidee
Vol 8 (2021): June
Criminal Law

Restorative Justice Arrangements in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System: A Contribution of Thoughts
Pengaturan Restorative Justice dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia: Sebuah Sumbangsih Pemikiran

View Article
  • Abdul Wahid*
Abdul Wahid
Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Tadulako, Indonesia *

(*) Corresponding Author
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v8i0.778


Picture in here are illustration from public domain image or provided by the author, as part of their works
Published June 17, 2021
Keywords
  • Restorative Justice,
  • Criminal Justice System,
  • Criminal Procedural Code
How to Cite
Wahid, A. (2021). Restorative Justice Arrangements in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System: A Contribution of Thoughts. Rechtsidee, 8, 10.21070/jihr.v8i0.778. https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v8i0.778

Copyright (c) 2021 Abdul Wahid (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

The criminal justice system has an orientation to involve various components to prevent the occurrence of criminal acts. In the practice of criminal law, the idea of ​​restorative justice has emerged in the practice of law in Indonesia. This study aims to initiate the regulation of restorative justice in the Criminal Procedure Code as part of the criminal justice system's development. This research is normative legal research oriented to the study and analysis of positive law. This study examines the legal issue, namely the legal vacuum in the regulation of restorative justice in the Criminal Procedure Code. The study results confirm that restorative justice is part of the criminal justice system, especially in the aspect of the criminal justice system process, which effectively and efficiently strengthens the orientation of the legal process effectively and efficiently in criminal law enforcement. In this context, restorative justice is part of the development of legal theory and practice and an effort to revive the value of local wisdom in Indonesian criminal law. The Ius constituendum or future arrangements related to restorative justice in the Criminal Procedure Code need to be carried out so that the Criminal Procedure Code can guide the implementation of formal law in Indonesia that has Indonesian aspirations, especially with the application of restorative justice in practice as well as the pouring of restorative justice in the Criminal Procedure Code which is essential to ensure legal certainty as well as provide a dimension of harmony for restorative justice arrangements

View Article

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. M. Hidayat, “Meningkatkan Efektivitas Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia Melalui Peran Serta Detektif Swasta,” in SEMINAR NASIONAL KONSORSIUM UNTAG Indonesia ke-2, 2020, pp. 353–354.
  2. X. Dai, “Studies on the Legal Translation from the Perspective of Legal Pluralism,” Theory Pract. Lang. Stud., vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 973–977, 2019, doi: 10.30564/ret.v2i3.870.
  3. D. E. Purwoleksono, Hukum Pidana, 1st ed. Surabaya: Airlangga University Press, 2016.
  4. F. P. Disantara, “Konsep Pluralisme Hukum Khas Indonesia sebagai Strategi Menghadapi Era Modernisasi Hukum,” Al-Adalah J. Huk. dan Polit. Islam, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–36, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.35673/ajmpi.v6i1.1129.
  5. N. I. S. A. Nasution, “Politik Hukum Pidana Kekerasan Seksual Dalam Rkuhp,” Khazanah Multidisiplin, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 45–56, 2021, doi: 10.15575/km.v2i1.11636.
  6. D. Plunkett and S. Shapiro, “Law, morality, and everything else: General jurisprudence as a branch of metanormative inquiry,” Ethics, vol. 128, no. 1, pp. 37–68, 2017, doi: 10.1086/692941.
  7. A. R. Hambali, “Penegakan Hukum Melalui Pendekatan Restorative Justice Penyelesaian Perkara Tindak Pidana,” Kalabbirang Law J., vol. 2, no. 1, p. 71, 2020.
  8. E. Syahputra, “Restorative Justice dalam Sistem peradilan pidana di Masa Yang Akan Datang,” Lex Lata, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 235, 2021.
  9. B. S. Panjaitan, “Restorative Justice Sebagai Penyelesaian Perkara Pidana Berbasis Korban,” Doktrina, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 159, 2022.
  10. P. M. Marzuki, Penelitiam Hukum, 13th ed. Jakarta: Kencana, 2017.
  11. M. H. Kramer, “Responsibility in Law and Morality,” Philos. Rev., vol. 113, no. 1, pp. 133–135, Jan. 2004, doi: 10.1215/00318108-113-1-133.
  12. Z. Junius Fernando, “Pentingnya Restorative Justice Dalam Konsep Ius Constituendum,” Al Imarah J. Pemerintah. Dan Polit. Islam, vol. 5, no. 2, p. 253, 2020, doi: 10.29300/imr.v5i2.3493.
  13. B. Z. Tamanaha, A realistic theory of law, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
  14. M. Sahputra, “Restorative justice sebagai Wujud Hukum Progresif dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan di Indonesia.,” Transform. Adm., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 90, 2022.
  15. K. E. Himma and B. Bix, Law and Morality. Routledge, 2017.
  16. F. C. Beiser, “Savigny and the Historical School of Law,” in The German Historicist Tradition, Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 214–252.
  17. E. Nurisman, “Risalah Tantangan Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual Pasca Lahirnya Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2022,” J. Pembang. Huk. Indones., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 170–196, 2022.
  18. K. H. M. A, Penerapan KUHAP Dalam Praktik Hukum. Malang: UMM Press, 2007.
  19. I. D. Marder, “Mapping restorative justice and restorative practices in criminal justice in the Republic of Ireland,” Int. J. Law, Crime Justice, vol. 70, no. March, p. 100544, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijlcj.2022.100544.
  20. M. Crouch, “The challenges for court reform after authoritarian rule: The role of specialized courts in indonesia,” Const. Rev., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–25, 2021, doi: 10.31078/consrev711.
  21. B. A. Chigara, “Towards a nemo judex in parte sua Critique of the International Criminal Court?,” Int. Crim. Law Rev., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 412–444, 2019, doi: 10.1163/15718123-01806004.
  22. R. Leider, “The Modern Common Law of Crime,” J. Crim. Law Criminol., vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 412–413, 2021.
  23. A. Atilgan, Global Constitutionalism: A Socio-legal Perspective, 1st ed. Berlin: Springer Nature, 2018.
  24. J. Přibáň, “Asking the sovereignty question in global legal pluralism: From ‘Weak’ jurisprudence to ‘Strong’ socio-legal theories of constitutional power operations,” Ratio Juris, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 31–51, 2015, doi: 10.1111/raju.12065.
  25. A. S. Ratna Anggraini, I Gusti Ayu Ketut Rachmi Handayani, “The Effectiveness of Political Law on the Development of Coastal Reclamation in Indonesia,” in 3rd International Conference on Globalization of Law and Local Wisdom, 2019, p. 187.
  26. Bustomi, “The Legality Principle Application in Indonesian Criminal Law System,” Nurani Huk., vol. 4, no. 2, p. 31, 2021.
  27. J. C. Thompson, “Law’s Autonomy and Moral Reason,” Laws, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 6, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.3390/laws8010006.
  28. G. Swenson, “Legal pluralism in theory and practice,” Int. Stud. Rev., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 438–462, 2018, doi: 10.1093/ISR/VIX060.
  29. R. Asher, “Unresolved Injustice : An Examination of Indigenous Legal Issues in Australia,” Udayana J. Law Cult., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 146–170, 2020.
  30. M. Reksodiputro, “Sistem peradilan pidana Indonesia (melihat kepada kejahatan dan penegakan hukum dalam batas-batas toleransi).” p. 1, 1993.
  31. H. Morgan, “Restorative justice and the school-to-prison pipeline: A review of existing literature,” Educ. Sci., vol. 11, no. 4, p. 3, 2021, doi: 10.3390/educsci11040159.
  32. H. F. F. David W. Neubauer, America’s Court and The Criminal Justice System, 1st ed. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2019.
  33. K. H. Edi Setiadi, Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terpadu dan Sistem Penegakan Hukum di Indonesia, 1st ed. Jakarta: Kencana, 2017.
  34. B. A. Garner and H. C. Black, Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th ed. Minnesotta: West Publishing Co, St. Paull, 2019.
  35. N. S. P. J. Appludnopsanji, Hari Sutra Disemadi, “Reformasi Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia Berwawasan Pancasila,” Kertha Wicaksana, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 4, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.22225/kw.15.1.2021.1-10.
  36. Viswandoro, Kamus Istilah Hukum: Sumber Rujukan Peristilahan Hukum, Cetakan ke. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Medpress Digital, 2014.
  37. R. Marbun, Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia: Suatu Pengantar, 1st ed. Malang: Setara Press, 2015.
  38. V. Wirawan, “Tindak Pidana Perpajakan dalam Pembuatan dan Pendaftaran Surat Keterangan Waris,” J. Ilm. Kebijak. Huk., vol. 15, no. 3, p. 503, 2021.
  39. W. Desideria Nyinaq, Harkirtan Kaur, “Assessing The View Of Criminology Science In Seniority Violence Cases,” Int. J. Soc. Policy Law, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 30, 2021.
  40. A. Romli, Sistem Peradilan Pidana Kontemporer, 1st ed. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2011.
  41. A. U. Jennifer C.Sarrett, “Beliefs about and perspectives of the criminal justice system of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A qualitative study,” Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 2, 2021.
  42. OECD, “Effectiveness and fairness of the justice system,” in Government at a Glance 2021, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2021, p. 49.
  43. A. Y. Mario Julyano, Sulistyawan, “Pemahaman Terhadap Asas Kepastian Hukum Melalui Konstruksi Penalaran Positivisme Hukum,” J. Crepido, vol. 01, no. 01, p. pp.13-22, 2019.
  44. L. J. Leonard, “Can Restorative Justice Provide a Better Outcome for Participants and Society than the Courts?,” Laws, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 3, 2022, doi: 10.3390/laws11010014.
  45. G. G. Bateman, “The Ough To Be a Law: Gustav Radbruch, Lon L. Fuller, and H.L.A. Hart on The Choice Between Natural Law and Legal Positivism,” J. Jurisprud., vol. 271, no. 1, pp. 13–15, 2019, doi: 10.1093/ojls/gqi042.
  46. H. A. Santoso, “Perspektif Keadilan Hukum Teori Gustav Radbruch Dalam Putusan Pkpu ‘PTB,’” Jatiswara, vol. 36, no. 3, p. 329, 2021.
  47. M. Bell, “John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle and Free Speech: Expanding the Notion of Harm,” Utilitas, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2020.
  48. M. L. Setiaji and A. Ibrahim, “Kajian Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Negara the Rule of Law : Antara Hukum Progresif Dan Hukum Positif,” Lex Sci. Law Rev., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 123–138, 2018, doi: 10.15294/lesrev.v2i2.27580.
  49. A. Mendenhall, “Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and the Darwinian Common Law Paradigm,” Eur. J. Pragmatism Am. Philos., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 1–22, 2015.
  50. R. Tomalili and A. Ariadi, “Implementasi Restorative Justice Dalam Perspektif Hukum Pidana Melalui Pendekatan Kearifan Lokal,” Akrab Juara, vol. 6, no. 4, p. 212, 2021.
  51. S. Taekema, “ How to Be a Transnational Jurist: Reflections on Cotterrell’s Sociological Jurisprudence ,” Ratio Juris, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 509–520, 2019, doi: 10.1111/raju.12263.
  52. K. W. Simanjuntak, “Pengambilan Minuta Akta Dan Pemanggilan Notaris Serta Hak Ingkar Notaris Berdasarkan Sumpah Jabatan Notaris Dalam Pemeriksaan Perkara Perdata Di Pengadilan,” JUSITISI, 2019.
  53. B. D. A. Andri Setiawan, Antikowati Antikowati, “Kekuatan Mengikat Putusan Pengujian Undang-Undang Oleh Mahkamah Kostitusi Terhadap Putusan Pengujian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Oleh Mahkamah Agung,” Legis. Indones., vol. 18, no. 1, p. 19, 2021.
  54. E. D. Safitri and N. Sa’adah, “Penerapan Upaya Administratif Dalam Sengketa Tata Usaha Negara,” J. Pembang. Huk. Indones., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 34–45, 2021.
  55. H. Xanthaki, “Legislative drafting:a new sub-discipline of law is born,” IALS Student Law Rev., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 57–62, 2017.