Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

""Restorative Justice" is a model approach which emerged in the 1960s in an effort to solve criminal cases. Unlike the approach used in conventional criminal justice system, this approach focuses on the direct participation of perpetrators, victims and society in the settlement process. This theory of the approach is still debated, but the view is in fact growing and it exercises a lot of influence on legal policies and practices in several countries. The UN through its basic principles considers the approach of restorative justice as the approach which could be used in the rational criminal justice system. Restorative justice is a concept of thinking that supports the development of the criminal justice system with emphasis on the required involvement of the community. It is also involving the casualties who with the current criminal justice system are excluded. In several countries, restorative justice has been translated into a variety of formulations to accommodate a variety of values, philosophical basis, terms, strategies, mechanisms, and programs. Good consultation with the perpetrators and the victims themselves may provide the public with a different mindset in preventing emerging problems. This process can involve the police, prosecutorial institution or the traditional institutions. Therefore, without excluding the work in the formal legal system, the institutional mechanism for resolution through consultation was working in the community. In the various principles and models of the restorative justice approach, the process of dialogue between the perpetrator and the victim is a fundamental and the also the most important part of the application of the restorative justice. The direct dialogue between the perpetrator and the victim gave the victim the opportunity to express what he/she felt, hope for human rights and the desire to reach a criminal settlement."

"Artikel ini membahas peran Polri semenjak dipisahkannya Polri darilingkungan ABRI yaitu harus meninggalkan pendekaran militer menjadipendekatan sipil. Berdasarkan telaahan terhadap berbagai peraturanperundangan yang relevan dengan tugas Polri secara perkembanganpemikiran dalam kriminologi, dapat disimpulkan bahwa POLRI dalammelaksanakan fungsi penegakan hukum dan menjaga ketertiban sosial, harusmengedepankan hak-hak asasi manusia serta berusaha menyelesaikanmasalah kriminalitas dengan pendekaran restorative justice."

"Skripsi ini membahas tentang keberadaan pengecualian pelanggaran berat HAM dalam hukum internasional mengenai imunitas negara. Pertanyaan dasar yang menjadi pusat penulisan skripsi ini adalah dapat tidaknya imunitas negara di hadapan pengadilan negara lain dikesampingkan bilamana negara yang pertama tersebut telah melakukan pelanggaran berat HAM. Dengan demikian skripsi ini membahas pertemuan/persinggungan antara dua norma dalam hukum internasional. Dalam satu sisi, kedaulatan setiap negara dalam hubungan internasional pada umumnya dianggap sama - dengan demikian satu negara tidak berhak mengadili negara lain karena mereka sejajar. Di sisi lain, pertumbuhan rezim perlindungan terhadap pelanggaran berat HAM telah berkembang sedemikian rupa sehingga menjadisalah satu rezim norma tertinggi dalam hukum internasional - keberadaan tersebut menimbulkan kebutuhan akan penegakan norma dengan lebih pasti. Kepastian penegakkan norma tersebut terkadang terhalang oleh alasan-alasan prosedural jika para korban pelanggaran HAM berat menggantungkan nasibnya pada mahkamah internasional, forum internasional lainnya, dan/atau sistem peradilan negara pelanggar berat HAM itu sendiri.

---

This study explains about the existence of the gross human rights violation exception to the international law on state immunity. The core question underlying this study is whether or not it is possible to set aside a state?s jurisdictional immunity in other state in the event that the former state has committed gross human rights violation. Accordingly this study discusses about the intersection between two norms of international law. On one hand, sovereignty of all states is regarded as equal - so as to disable one state to adjudicate other state because they are equal. On the other hand, the development of the regime of protection against gross human rights violation has reached such level that it becomes one of the highest international law norms - such nature produces the need for a more reliable enforcement regime. Such reliability of enforcement regime is sometimes clouded by procedural reasons when the victims of gross human rights violation depend their fate on the International Court of Justice, other international fora, and/or the violator state's own judicial system."

"Human dignity is now a central feature of many modern constitutions and international documents. As a constitutional value, human dignity involves a person's free will, autonomy, and ability to write a life story within the framework of society. As a constitutional right, it gives full expression to the value of human dignity, subject to the specific demands of constitutional architecture. This analytical study of human dignity as both a constitutional value and a constitutional right adopts a legal-interpretive perspective. It explores the sources of human dignity as a legal concept, its role in constitutional documents, its content, and its scope. The analysis is augmented by examples from comparative legal experience, including chapters devoted to the role of human dignity in American, Canadian, German, South African, and Israeli constitutional law."

"

ABSTRAK Disertasi ini merupakan penelitian juridis normatif yang dilakukan dengan menggunakan privacy rights theory, prinsip-prinsip internasional tentang penerapan hak asasi manusia dalam communication surveillance dan teori sistem peradilan pidana. Fokus penelitian ini adalah mengkaji bagaimana hukum di Indonesia mengakomodir prinsip-prinsip perlindungan terhadap hak asasi dari intersepsi baik dalam konstitusi, peraturan perundang-undangan, dan putusan pengadilan serta perbandingannya dengan negara Amerika Serikat, Australia, Belanda, Inggris dan Prancis. Hasil penelitian ini mendapati bahwa intersepsi merupakan tindakan yang melanggar zona privasi, tindakan tersebut merupakan tindakan yang dilarang. Tindakan intersepsi memiliki karakter yang khusus dan berbeda dengan upaya paksa lainnya, oleh karena intersepsi dilakukan dengan cara rahasia, tidak terlihat dan tidak terasa. Penelitian ini menegaskan bahwa intersepsi selain berfungsi sebagai upaya paksa khusus namun terkadang dapat disalahgunakan dan melanggar hak asasi manusia. Intersepsi dipandang sebagai tindakan yang mengurangi hak privasi, namun intersepsi tetap dipergunakan oleh aparat penegak hukum dimanapun didunia ini sebagai salah satu instrumen upaya paksa dengan pertimbangan adanya kebutuhan untuk penegakan hukum. Hal tersebut dimungkinkan karena hak privasi masih termasuk derogable rights sehingga hak privasi masih dapat dibatasi sepanjang pembatasan tersebut dilakukan berdasarkan undang-undang. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa intersepsi yang diatur di Indonesia baru sebatas pemberian wewenang (legality) kepada aparat untuk penegakan hukum (legitimate aim) dan belum menerapkan prinsip proportionality dan necessity. Selain itu prinsip admisibility dan due process of law belum sepenuhnya diadopsi dalam hukum acara pidana Indonesia sehingga hakim belum banyak berperan dalam menentukan keabsahan alat bukti yang diperoleh dari intersepsi. Sehingga alat bukti yang diperoleh dengan melanggar hak asasi manusia pun masih dapat diakui sebagai alat bukti yang sah dan digunakan sebagai pertimbangan hakim dalam putusannya. Hal tersebut berbeda dinegara Amerika Serikat, Australia, Belanda, Inggris dan Prancis yang menerapkan menerapkan prinsip-prinsip tersebut. Penelitian ini menemukan RUU KUHAP saat ini berupaya membangun hukum acara pidana Indonesia yang compatible dengan prinsip-prinsip penghormatan terhadap hak asasi manusia di atas. Oleh karena itu saran dari hasil penelitian ini berupa : Pertama, diperlukan unifikasi bentuk upaya paksa dalam satu peraturan perundang-undangan yang menerapkan prinsip legitimate aim, necessity dan proportionality sehingga intersepsi dipandang sebagai upaya terakhir setelah jalan lain sudah ditempuh sebelumnya. Kedua, memberlakukan hukum acara pidana yang menerapkan prinsip admisibility dan due process of law sehingga hakim lebih berperan dalam menentukan keabsahan alat bukti dan membatalkan alat bukti yang diperoleh dengan melanggar hak asasi. Ketiga merobah klasifikasi alat bukti tertutup yang diatur dalam Pasal 184 KUHAP menjadi klasifikasi alat bukti terbuka dengan menambahkan klausula pengamatan hakim dalam persidangan sehingga alat bukti apapun dapat diterima di pengadilan (admissible) sepanjang diperoleh secara sah. Keempat, agar RUU KUHAP saat ini diteruskan pembahasannya dan untuk melengkapinya diperlukan suatu RPP yang mengatur secara detail teknis dari tatacara intersepsi, misalnya monitoring pasca dilakukannya intersepsi melalui post audit oleh lembaga eksternal diluar lembaga penegak hukum yang melakukan intersepsi.

---

ABSTRACT This dissertation is a normative juridical research which has been conducted by using privacy rights theory, international principles about implementing of human rights in communication surveillance and theory of the criminal justice system. The focus of this research is to study how the law in Indonesia accommodates the principles of the protection to the human rights of interception whether in the constitution, legislation, verdicts, and its comparison with the United States, Australia, Netherland, UK, and France. The result of this research found that interception is an intrusion to privacy zone, and it is a forbidden act. Interception, however, has special characteristics and differ with other coercion, therefore interception is done by secret, is not visible and is not noticeably. This research affirm that interception beside has its functions as a special coercion but sometimes can be misused and violate the human rights. Interception is deemed as an action which decrease the privacy right, but however it is used as a tools of state by the law enforcement officer in the world with the law enforcement consideration. It is still possible to be done because the privacy right is classified as derogable rights therefore it is could be limited by the regulations. This research found that the interception regulated in Indonesia is merely granting authority (legality) to the law enforcement agencies (legitimate aim) and yet implemented proportionality and necessity principles. Moreover, the principle of admissibility and due process of law are not entirely adopted yet in Indonesian criminal procedure so that the judge does not get his perfect role in determining the validity of evidence obtained from the interception. It is so that the evidence obtained by violating human rights can still be admitted as a valid evidence and it can be used as a Judge consideration in its verdict. The situation above is different in the law system of USA, Australia, Netherland, UK, and France which have applied such principles. This research found that the Draft of Criminal Procedure Code nowadays tries to build Indonesian criminal procedural law that is compatible with the principles of respecting the human rights, as above. Because of that, the suggestions from this research are, as follow : One, it is required the unification in coercion within one regulations which implement the principles of legitimate aim, necessity and proportionality, therefore interception can be regarded as the last resort after other coercion had previously been through. Two, imposing criminal procedural law which implement the principle of admissibility and due process of law therefore the judge is able to play it’s role in determining the validity of the evidence and exclude the evidence which was obtained by violating human rights. Three, to amend the classification of limited evidence-which is regulated in Chapter 184 Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) – to be the classification of unlimited evidence by ammending the clause of judge observation in the trial so that any evidence can be accepted in the court (admissible), as long as it is obtained lawfully. Four, Continuing the discussion of the Draft of Criminal Procedure Code in House Representative, and in order to complement it, it needs a RPP (Draft of Governmental Regulations) which regulates in detail, the technical order of interception, for example : monitoring the things after implementing the interception through post audit by external body outside the law enforcement agencies which implements the interception.

"

"Dua puluh tahun sejak transisi politik Indonesia pada tahun 1998, kasus-kasus pelanggaran HAM berat yang terjadi pada masa Orde Baru belum dapat diselesaikan. Indonesia menghadapi situasi impunitas, sementara agenda keadilan transisi semakin hilang dari diskursus publik. Disertasi ini meneliti dan menganalisa bagaimana pendekatan advokasi yang dilakukan oleh Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat LSM dan Komisi Nasional Hak Asasi Manusia Komnas HAM terhadap kebijakan Bantuan Medis dan Psikososial BMP Lembaga Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban LPSK , tidak hanya memperbaiki prosedur dan pelaksanaan kebijakan BMP tetapi juga dapat mendorong kelanjutan agenda keadilan transisi di Indonesia. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa kualitas pemulihan dari kebijakan BMP ditentukan oleh koherensi internal dan eksternal dari kebijakan tersebut. Advokasi yang dilakukan oleh LSM dan Komnas HAM terhadap kebijakan BMP telah menyentuh hal-hal yang menjadi masalah di dalam koherensi kebijakan BMP. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa pendekatan ilmu kesejahteraan sosial tidak hanya bersifat komplementer terhadap pendekatan hukum dalam memandang korban dan hak-hak korban, melainkan justru memberikan perspektif baru dalam memandang fungsi kelembagaan LPSK dan Komnas HAM sebagai Lembaga Pelayanan Manusia.

---

Twenty year after Indonesia rsquo;s political transition in 1998, gross human rights violations that occurred during the New Order have not yet being settled. Indonesia is facing impunity, meanwhile the transitional justice agendas are disappearing from public discourse. This dissertation studies and analyses how the advocacy approach, which have been used by Non Governmental Organizations NGOs and the National Human Rights Commission of Indonesia Komnas HAM towards the Medical and Psychosocial Assistance rsquo;s policy BMP of the Victims and Witness Protection Agency LPSK , could not only improve the procedures and the implementation of BMP policy, but could also further drive the transitional justice agendas in Indonesia. This research found that the quality of reparation provided by BMP policy was determined by the internal and external coherence of the policy. Advocacy that were conducted by NGOs and Komnas HAM towards BMP policy have addressed the coherences of BMP policy. This research concludes that social welfare approach is not just a complementary to the legal approach in looking at the victims and the rights they are entitled. Instead, it gives new perspective in looking at the institutional role of LPSK and Komnas HAM as Human Service Organizations HSO ."

"Penelitian ini mengkaji esensi dari prinsip keadilan restoratif sebagai pendekatan dalam penyelesaian kasus pidana, dan bertujuan untuk memberikan gambaran tentang pembangunan prinsip keadilan restoratif dalam penegakan hukum pidana. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa prinsip keadilan restoratif telah digunakan di berbagai pembelajaran dalam pemahaman sebagai metode penyelesaian kasus pidana alternatif, dengan cara posisi di luar sistem peradilan pidana. Ternyata dalam prakteknya, bagaimanapun, memiliki kelemahan tertentu, terutama mengingat aspek akuntabilitas dan legitimasi pendiriannya. Oleh karena itu, ada kebutuhan untuk proses penyelidikan ilmiah untuk tujuan menentukan status pihak yang terlibat dalam sebuah kasus, serta untuk posisi kasus yang bersangkutan. Berdasarkan pandangan tersebut, prinsip keadilan restoratif tampaknya merupakan pendekatan yang ideal untuk diterapkan dalam sistem peradilan pidana.

---

This research reviews the essence of the restorative justice principle as an approach in the settlement of criminal cases, and it aims to provide an overview of the construction of the restorative justice principle in criminal law enforcement. The outcomes of the research indicate that the restorative justice principle has been subject to frequent study in its understanding as an alternative criminal case settlement method, by way of positioning outside the criminal judiciary system. As it turns out in practice, however, it has certain weaknesses, particularly in view of the accountability and legitimacy aspects of its establishment. Therefore, there is a need for a scientific investigation process for the purpose of determining the status of parties involved in a case, as well as for positioning the case concerned. Based on such view, the restorative justice principle appears to be the ideal approach to be applied in the criminal judiciary system."