Volume 08 Issue 01 January 2025
1Rini Fitri Octa Amelia, 2Nila Anesia, 3Hasby Muhammad Zamri,4Lucky Ferdiles, S.H., M.H
1,2,3Student, Magister of Law, Borobudur University, Jakarta
4Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Borobudur University, Jakarta
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v8-i1-26Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
This study aims to determine the criminal law policy of the principle of rechterlijk pardon (forgiveness of judges) in the National Criminal Code punishment system. The formulation of the problem discussed by the researcher is how the criminal law policy of the rechterlijk pardon principle in the National Criminal Code punishment system. This research also discusses what is the urgency of the rechterlijk pardon principle in the National Criminal Code punishment system. This research includes normative legal research, with data collected based on written regulations and experts' opinions. The results of this study indicate that the criminal law policy of rechterlijk pardon formulation is in accordance with the values of the Indonesian nation based on Pancasila. The rechterlijk pardon policy as contained in Article 54 paragraph (2) of the National Criminal Code is a new breakthrough in the National Criminal Code's punishment system as well as a punishment guideline that was previously absent in the WvS Criminal Code which is still in effect. The judge is given the authority to forgive the perpetrator of a criminal offense even though the perpetrator is proven guilty. The forgiveness given by the judge is certainly a consideration of the legal objectives in the form of legal justice, legal certainty, and legal expediency.
KEYWORDS:Rechterlijk Pardon, Policy, Criminal Code, Judge
REFERENCES1) Arief, B.N. (2018). Masalah Penegakan Hukum Dan Kebijakan Hukum Pidana Dalam Penanggulangan Kejahatan. Jakarta: Prenada Media.
2) Arief, B.N. (2011). Perkembangan Sistem Pemidanaan Di Indonesia. Semarang: Pustaka Magister.
3) Arief, B.N. (2010). Kebijakan Hukum Pidana; Perkembangan Penyusunan Konsep KUHP Baru. Jakarta: Kencana Media Group.
4) Arief, B.N. (2009). RUU KUHP Baru: Sebuah Restrukturisasi/Rekonstruksi Sistem Hukum Pidana Indonesia. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
5) Arief, B.N. (2007). Masalah Penegakan Hukum dan Kebijakan Penganggulangan Kejahatan. Jakarta: Kencana.
6) Farikhah, M. (2023). Rekonseptualisasi Judicial Pardon Dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia (Studi Perbandingan Sistem Hukum Indonesia Dengan Sistem Hukum Barat). Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, Vol. 48 No. 3, Universitas Indonesia, 556-588.
7) Garner, B.A. (2004). Black’s Law Dictionary Edisi ke 8. Minnesota: Thomson West Publishing Co.
8) Mamudji, S., & Soekanto, S. (2003). Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
9) Marbun, R. (2014). Grand Design Politik Hukum Pidana dan Sistem Hukum Pidana Indonesia Berdasarkan Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia 1945. Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vol. 1 No. 3, Universitas Padjadjaran, 565.
10) Marpaung, L. (2012). Asas Teori Praktik Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
11) Marzuki, & Mahmud, P. (2006). Penelitian Hukum. Bandung: Prenada Media Group.
12) Moor, K.D. (1989). Pardons: Justice, Mercy, and The Public Interest. New York: Oxford University Press.
13) Muladi. (1995). Kapita Selekta Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
14) Muladi, & Arief, B.N. (1984). Teori-Teori dan Kebijakan Pidana. Bandung: Alumni.
15) Reksodiputro, M. (2009). Menyelaraskan Pembaharuan Hukum (Pemberian Abolisi Dalam Perkara Mantan Presiden Suharto Tidak Logis: Benarkah Itu). Jakarta: Komisi Hukum Nasional.
16) Saputro, A.A. (2016). Konsepsi Rechterlijk Pardon Atau Permaafan Hakim Dalam Rancangan KUHP. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, Vol. 18 No. 1, Universitas Gadjah Mada, 66.
17) Setiawan, A. (2021). Konsep Permaafan Hakim (Rechterlijk Pardon) Dalam Pembahuruan RUU KUHP Dan RUU KUHAP. Universitas Islam Indonesia, 44.
18) Zaidan, M.A. (2015). Menuju Pembaruan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: PT. Sinar Grafika