Kriteria/Keadaan yang Bersifat Kasuistik dalam Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif

Authors

  • Teza Salih Mauludin Universitas Padjadjaran
  • Lies Sulistiani Universitas Padjadjaran
  • Ajie Ramdan Universitas Padjadjaran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62383/presidensial.v1i4.196

Keywords:

casuistic, termination of prosecution based on restorative justice, discretion

Abstract

This legal research aims to examine the provisions of criteria/circumstances that are casuistic in the termination of prosecution based on restorative justice. Prosecutor's Regulation Number 15 of 2020 concerning the Termination of Prosecution Based on Restorative Justice mentions the provisions of a quo in Article 5 Paragraph (2) and Article 5 Paragraph (5). The a quo provision in the regulation does not have clear indicators so it is prone to multiple interpretations. The research method used is normative juridical by examining literature materials or secondary data. There are two approaches, namely the legislative approach and the case approach. Data collection techniques are also used interview techniques in the form of questions and answers with the Public Prosecutor of the District Attorney's Office to obtain information that supports this research. The results of the study show that there are no clear indicators of criteria/circumstances of a casuistic nature in the termination of prosecution based on restorative justice has implications for the results of the public prosecutor's decision to consider the application for Restorative Justice. The absence of explanation of the provision was returned to the consideration of the public prosecutor with discretionary authority.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abbas Said. 2013. Pengawasan Terhadap Penggunaan Diskresi Oleh Polisi Dan Jaksa Dalam Proses Penegakan Hukum Pidana. Disertasi. Fakutas Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran.

Akbar, MF. 2022. Pembaharuan Keadilan Restoratif dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Jurnal Masalah-Masalah Hukum. 51 (2).

Andrew Louth. 2022. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (4 ed.). Oxford University Press. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780199642465.001.0001/acref-9780199642465-e-1283?rskey=qdZbr1&result=4

Dwiyanto. 2006. Reformasi Birokrasi Publik di Indonesia. Gadjah Mada University Press. Yogyakarta.

Gelsthorpe, L. Padfield, N. 2003. Exercising Discretion Decision-Making in the Criminal Justice System and Beyord. Willan Publishing. United Kingdom.

HR. R. 2018. Hukum Administrasi Negara Edisi Revisi cetakan Ke-9. Rajawali Pers. Jakarta.

Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia (KBBI). 2012. Arti Kasuistik. https://kbbi.web.id/kasuistik-2

Mauludin, TS. Sulistiani, L. Ramdan, A. 2024. Penyimpangan Terhadap Pasal 5 Ayat (1) Huruf B Dan C Peraturan Kejaksaaan Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 tentang Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif terhadap Perkara yang Memiliki Kriteria/Keadaan yang Bersifat Kasuistik. Rewang Rencang : Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis. 5 (7).

Simon Blackburn. 2016. A Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford University Press. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780198735304.001.0001/acref-9780198735304-e-503?rskey=qdZbr1&result=8

Soekanto, S. 1986. Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. UI Press, Jakarta.

Published

2024-10-15

How to Cite

Teza Salih Mauludin, Lies Sulistiani, & Ajie Ramdan. (2024). Kriteria/Keadaan yang Bersifat Kasuistik dalam Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif. Presidensial: Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Negara, Dan Kebijakan Publik, 1(4), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.62383/presidensial.v1i4.196

Similar Articles

<< < 1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.