Juridical Review of Obstacles to The Implementation of Restorative Justice in The Crime of Theft
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35877/454RI.daengku1083Keywords:
Prosecutor's Office, Restorative Justice, Crime of TheftAbstract
This study aims to determine the role of the public prosecutor in the application of PERJA Number 15 of 2020 concerning Termination of Prosecution Based on Restorative Justice against criminal cases of theft and to determine the role of the prosecutor in the future in implementing Restorative Justice against criminal acts of theft whose losses have been recovered exceeding Rp 2,500,000,- (Two Million Five Hundred Thousand). This type of research is empirical juridical legal research, where the data is obtained from the field and described following the actual reality. The results of the study show that (1) cases that were settled based on PERJA Number 15 of 2020 concerning Termination of Prosecution Based on Restorative Justice must prioritize a peace agreement between the two parties by taking into account three main elements, namely the suspect is the first time to commit a crime, a crime only threatened with imprisonment of not more than 5 (five) years, and the loss of a crime not more than Rp 2,500,000,- (two million five hundred thousand rupiah). (2) The Public Prosecutor is considered to be too rigid in interpreting the phrase in Article 5 paragraph (1) letter c in which the loss of a criminal act cannot be more than Rp 2,500,000,- (two million five hundred thousand rupiah), even though there has been an agreement peace between the two parties, and the victim's losses have been restored to their original state, with an additional Rp 12,000,000,- (twelve million rupiahs). The application of Restorative Justice by the Public Prosecutor is not always fixed on the nominal limit according to the PERMA of Rp 2,500,000- (two million five hundred thousand rupiah) to realize the original condition, which is intended so that the victim who initially felt aggrieved due to the suspect's actions feels restored to his condition so that a peace agreement can be created between the victim and the perpetrator.
References
Amir Ilyas, (2012), Asas-asas Hukum Pidana, Memahami Tindak Pidana dan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Sebagamana Syarat Pemidanaan. Rangkang Education, Yogyakarta.
Chairul Huda, 2006, Dari Tiada Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan Menuju Kepada Tiada Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan: Tinjauan Kritis terhadap Teori Pemisahan Tindak Pidana dan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana, Jakarta: Pernada Media.
Eva Achjani Zulfa, Keadilan Restoratif, (Jakarta: Badan Penerbit FH UI, 2009).
H. A. K. Moch. Anwar, Hukum Pidana Bagian Khusus (KUHP Buku II). Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung, 1989.
Hanafi Amrani dan Mahrus Ali, 2015, Sistem Pertanggungjawaban Pidana: Perkembangan dan Penerapan, Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
Irwansyah. (2020). Penelitian Hukum: Pilihan Metode & Praktik Penulisan Artikel. Yogyakarta: Mitra Buana Media.
Hyronimus Rhiti, Filsafat Hukum Edisi Lengkap (Dari Klasik ke Postmodernisme), Ctk. Kelima, Universitas Atma Jaya, Yogyakarta, 2015.
Teguh Prasetyo, 2014, Hukum Pidana, Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Teori Hukum, Strategi Tertib Manusia Lintas Ruang dan Generasi, Bernard L Tanya, Yoan Simanjuntak dan Markus Hage, Genta Publishing, 2010.
Tony Marshall, 1999, Restorative Justice: An Overview, London: Home Office Research Developement and Statistic Directorat.
Umbret Mark S. dkk, Restorative Justice in the 21st Century: A Social Movement Full of Opportunities and Pitfalls, Marquette Law Review, 2009.
Gordon Bazemore dan Mara Schiff, Juvenile Justice Reform and Restorative justice: Building Theory and Policy from Practice, (Oregon, Willan Publishing, 2005).
Jan Remmelink, Hukum Pidana, Komentar Atas Pasal-pasal Terpenting dari Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana Belanda dan Padananya dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana Indonesia, diterjemahkan oleh Tristam Pascal Moeljono, Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 2003.
Kevin I. Mirror dan J. T. Morrison, 1996, A Theoritical Study and Critique of Restorative Justice, in Burt Galaway and Joe Hudson, eds., Restorative Justice International Perspective, New York: Criminal Justice-Press and Krueger Publications.
Lamintang, Delik-delik Khusus Kejahatan terhadap Harta Kekayaan, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2009.
Luhut MP Pangaribuan, 2009, Lay Judges & Hakim Ad Hoc: Suatu Studi Teoritis Mengenai Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia, Jakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia.
M. Agus Santoso, Hukum,Moral & Keadilan Sebuah Kajian Filsafat Hukum, Ctk. Kedua, Kencana, Jakarta, 2014.
M. Taufik Makaro, 2013, Pengkajian Hukum Tentang Penerapan Restorative Justice dalam Tindak Pidana yang Dilakukan Oleh Anak-Anak, Jakarta: BPHN Kementerian Hukum dan HAM.
Muhammad Syukri Albani Nasution, Hukum dalam Pendekatan Filsafat, Ctk. Kedua, Kencana, Jakarta, 2017.
Muladi, Kapita Selekta Sistem Peradilan Pidana, cet. 1, Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Moeljatno, Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta, 2003.
Romli Atmasasmita, 1996, Sistem Peradilan Pidana Perspektif Eksistensialisme dan Abolisionisme, Bandung: Bina Cipta.
Satjipto Rahardjo, Ilmu Hukum, Ctk. Kedelapan, Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung, 2014.
Sudarsono, Kamus Hukum, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta, 1992.
Suharto RM, Hukum Pidana Materiil, Unsur-Unsur Obyektif sebagai Dasar Dakwaan, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2002.
O. Notohamidjojo, Soal-Soal pokok Filsafat Hukum, Griya Media, 2011.
Wirjono Prodjodikoro, Tindak-tindak Pidana Tertentu di Indonesia, Replika Aditama, Bandung, 2008.
Henny Saida Flora, 2018, Keadilan Restoratif Sebagai Alternatif dalam Penyelesaian Tindak Pidana dan Pengaruhnya dalam Sistem Peradilan Indonesia, UBELAJ Jurnal, Volume 3, Issue 2.
ST. Burhanudin dalam Webbinar Bertajuk "Penegakan Hukum yang Berkualitas dan Berkeadilan" Persatuan Jaksa Indonesia (PJI) Wilayah Sulawesi Selatan bekerja sama dengan Pusat Kajian Kejaksaan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Hasanuddin, Makassar, 14 Oktober 2020
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
