Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Dalam perjalannya, Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia kerap kali menghasilkan suatu hasil yang menimbulkan respon beragaram di kalangan masyarakat. seperti contohnya kasus nenek minah dan kasus kakek samirin yang dilimpahkan ke tahapan persidangan dan menimbulkan reaksi negatif dari masyarakat. Kejadian tersebut menimbulkan pertanyaan, apakah Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia sangat bersifat punitif atau mengedepankan pembalasan. Apabila kita melihat ke dalam Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana (“KUHAP”) diketahui bahwa Kejaksaan selaku dominus litis memiliki suatu wewenang untuk melakukan penyaringan atau menentukan apakah suatu perkara layak atau tidak untuk dilimpahkan ke tahapan persidangan. Proses ini kemudian dilakukan melalui suatu mekanisme penghentian penuntutan yang diatur di dalam Pasal 140 ayat (2) KUHAP. Meskipun begitu, belum terdapat standar dari layak atau tidaknya suatu perkara untuk dilimpahkan ke tahapan persidangan. Saat ini, telah diterbitkan Peraturan Kejaksaan Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 (“PERJA 15 Tahun 2020”) yang mengatur mengenai pelaksanaan kewenangan penghentian penuntutan berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif. Penelitian ini akan membahas dua permasalahan. Pertama, membahas bagaimana pengaturan Peran dari Penuntut Umum dalam pelaksanaan penghentian penuntutan berdasarkan keadilan restoratif selaku dominus litis dan kedua membahas mengenai bagaimana penerapan keadilan restoratif dalam PERJA 15 Tahun 2020 dan kepastian hukum yang diberikannya terhadap aparat penegak hukum dan para pihak terkait. Bentuk penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan tipe penelitian deskriptif dengan melakukan Analisa terhadap peraturan yang ada dan juga wawancara terhadap beberapa narasumber. Hasil penelitian yang didapatkan adalah bahwa Kejaksaan selaku dominus litis belum diatur lebih jelas mengenai pelaksanaan kewenangan penghentian penuntutan berdasarkan KUHAP, namun melalui PERJA 15 Tahun 2020 pelaksanaan penghentian penuntutan berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif telah diatur secara rinci bagaimana pelaksanaan dan persyaratan dalam melakukan kewenangan tersebut. Selain itu juga, diketahui bahwa terhadap aparat penegak hukum PERJA 15 Tahun 2020 telah memberikan kepastian hukum terhadap pelaksaan dari kewenangan tersebut dan terhadap para pihak yang menginginkan perdamaian PERJA 15 Tahun 2020 telah memberikan kepastian hukum tersebut. Meskipun begitu, didapatkan hasil bahwa penerapan konsep dari Keadilan Restoratif dalam PERJA 15 Tahun 2020 masih belum sempurna karena seakan-akan masih mengesampingkan pemulihan terhadap Pelaku dan Pihak lainnya yang terkait dan hanya memfokuskan pemulihan terhadap Korban saja.

---

In its journey, the criminal justice system in Indonesia often produces a result that raises mixed responses among the public. Such as the case of Minah and the case of Samirin which were transferred to the trial stage and caused negative reactions from the community. This incident raises the question of whether the criminal justice system in Indonesia is very punitive or prioritizes retaliation. If we look into the Indonesian criminal procedure code (KUHAP), it is known that the State Prosecutors as the dominus litis have the authority to filter or determine whether a case is appropriate or not to be transferred to the trial stage. This process is then carried out through a mechanism for stopping prosecution by the state prosecutors as regulated in article 140 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Even so, there is no standard yet on whether or not a case is appropriate to be transferred to the trial stage. Currently, the Prosecutors Regulation Number 15 of 2020 (PERJA 15 of 2020) has been issued which regulates the implementation of the authority to terminate prosecution based on restorative justice. This research will discuss two problems. First, it discusses how the regulation on the role of the public prosecutor in implementing the termination of prosecution based on restorative justice as dominus litis and secondly discusses how the implementation of the restorative justice concept in PERJA 15 2020 and the legal certainty it provides to law enforcement officers and related parties. The form of research used is normative juridical with descriptive research by analyzing existing regulations and also interviewing several sources. The results of the research obtained are that the State Prosecutors as dominus litis has not been regulated more clearly regarding the implementation of the authority to terminate prosecution under the criminal procedure code, but through the implementation of PERJA 15 2020, the execution of termination of prosecution based on restorative justice has been regulated in details on how the implementation and requirements in exercising this authority. In addition, it is known that PERJA 15 2020 has provided legal certainty for the implementation of this authority by state prosecutors and for those who want to solve their problems with a restorative approach. Even so, It was found that the application of the restorative justice concept was still not perfect because it seemed as if it still ruled out the recovery or the restorative of the perpetrators and other parties involved and only focused on the restorative for the victim."

"Penerapan restorative justice di lingkup penuntutan melalui Perja 15/2020 merupakan aturan hukum baru dibandingkan di tingkat penyelidikan, penyidikan dan pengadilan. Statusnya yang masih baru menjadikan peraturan ini sebagai sebuah tantangan tersendiri bagi jaksa untuk menerapkannya dalam rangka restorative justice, termasuk bagi para jaksa di Kejari Medan yang sejak dikeluarkannya Perja tersebut baru menerapkan restorative justice pada 15 April 2021. Penelitian ini bermaksud menelaah tiga hal; pertama, penerapan restorative justice di Kejari Medan berdasarkan Perja 15/2020; kedua, kendala-kendala yang dihadapi Kejari Medan dalam menerapkan restorative justice; dan ketiga, pelaksanaan ideal restorative justice di masa yang akan datang. Jenis penelitian ini ialah penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan konseptual dan perundang-undangan. Jenis data yang digunakan merupakan data sekunder yang didukung dengan data primer berupa wawancara dan pengisian kuesioner yang diolah serta dianalisis secara deskriptif-kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa; pertama, penerapan restorative justice di Kejari Medan berdasarkan Perja 15/2020 belum dapat berjalan maksimal, terbukti sampai saat ini baru satu kasus yang dapat diselesaikan menggunakan mekanisme tersebut, yaitu kasus tindak pidana penganiayaan dengan tersangka Hengky dan korban Nilawati pada bulan April di tahun 2021; kedua, adapun kendala-kendala yang dihadapi Kejari Medan dalam menerapkan restorative justice dilandasi atas permasalahan pengaturan yang masih dianggap sangat umum dan tidak mengatur teknis pelaksanaan sehingga menimbulkan kebingungan bagi jaksa pelaksana, struktur pelaksana yang masih belum sepenunya siap melaksanakan restorative justice, fasilitas dan sarana penunjang pelaksanaan yang masih minim, serta partisipasi dan budaya hukum masyarakat sekaligus juga dari internal jaksa sendiri yang masih belum sepenuhnya menerima penyelesaian restorative justice; dan ketiga, konsep ideal penerapan restorative justice di masa yang akan datang didasarkan pada semangat penguatan singkronisasi sub-sistem dalam paradigma SPPT yang diejawantahkan melalui pengaturan ketentuan restorative justiceyang seragam.

---

The application of restorative justice in the scope of prosecution through the Attorney General’s Regulation 15/2020 is a new legal rule compared to the level of investigation, investigation, and court. However, due to its new status, it is actually a challenge and obstacle for prosecutors in implementing these regulations in the context of restorative justice, including for the Medan District Attorney, which since the issuance of the Regulation has only implemented restorative justice on April 15, 2021. This study intends to answer three questions, that is; first, the application of restorative justice at the Medan District Attorney based on the Attorney General’s Regulation 15/2020; second, the obstacles faced by the Medan District Attorney in implementing restorative justice; and third, the implementation of the ideal restorative justice in the future. This type of research is normative juridical research with a conceptual approach and legislation. The type of data used is secondary data which is supported by primary data in the form of interviews and filling out questionnaires which are processed and analyzed descriptively-qualitatively. The results showed that; first, the application of restorative justice at the Medan District Attorney based on the Attorney General’s Regulation 15/2020 has not been able to run optimally, it is proven that so far only one case can be resolved using this mechanism, namely the case of a criminal act of persecution with the suspect Hengky and the victim Nilawati in April in 2021; second, the obstacles faced by the Medan District Attorney in implementing restorative justice are based on regulatory issues which are still considered very general and do not regulate the technical implementation, causing confusion for the implementing prosecutor, the implementing structure which is still not fully ready to carry out restorative justice, facilities and supporting facilities. implementation is still minimal, as well as participation and legal culture of the community as well as from the internal prosecutors themselves who still have not fully accepted the restorative justice settlement; and third, the ideal concept of implementing restorative justice in the future is based on the spirit of strengthening sub-system synchronization in the Integrated Criminal Justice System paradigm which is embodied through the regulation of uniform restorative justice provisions."