By : Janu Farid Kesar )*
The revised Criminal Code (KUHP) apparently received resistance from several parties, however, the new Criminal Code is able to promote the corrective and restorative justice needed today.
It should be noted that corrective justice is justice related to wrong correction, providing compensation to the aggrieved party or appropriate punishment for the perpetrator of the crime.
Meanwhile, restorative justice is the restoration of good relations between the perpetrators of crime and victims of crime, so that the relationship between perpetrators of crime and victims of crime is no longer revenge.
Mufti Makarim as the Main Expert for Deputy V of the Presidential Staff Office (KSP) said that the Criminal Code is able to encourage the fulfillment of corrective and restorative justice.
He stated that the Criminal Code currently exists as a form of the paradigm of modern Indonesian criminal law and contains corrective and restorative justice elements that are relevant to human values and puts forward a contextual perspective in dealing with a criminal incident.
The element of corrective justice in the Criminal Code is reflected in efforts to deter perpetrators of crime, especially in crimes that threaten the safety of life and contain violence. In a broader context, it is hoped that a deterrence effect will occur in order to prevent massive and similar criminal acts in the future.
On the other hand, Mufti also said that the concept of punishment in the Criminal Code is now much more contextual, because it regulates several attempts at restorative justice or humane settlement of legal issues.
Previously, the restorative justice approach was regulated in the Restorative Justice Approach Letter which was regulated in the Decree of the Director of the General Court of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, regarding the application of guidelines for the application of restorative justice (Restorative Justice).
Mufti emphasized that through Judicial Pardon or forgiveness, judges have the authority to forgive someone who has committed a minor crime. The new Criminal Code also puts forward the concept of crime which takes into account the interests of the recovery of victims of criminal acts.
He said that this restorative aspect is important to ensure a balance is achieved in achieving the goals of law enforcement itself.
In the context of the Criminal Code, this restorative effort is important, because the purpose of law is not limited to achieving legal certainty alone, but must also be able to achieve justice and benefit the community. It is these goals that open space for restorative efforts in the Criminal Code.
Mufti stated that in the future the government will focus on socializing the Criminal Code to Law Enforcement Officials (APH), before the Criminal Code becomes effective in the next three years.
He also hopes that law enforcement officers will be able to understand the Criminal Code well and ensure that future implementation of the Criminal Code is consistent with the initial spirit of the drafting of this new KIHP.
APH need to understand that the Criminal Code currently regulates balances such as between public or state interests and individual interests, between elements of action and inner attitudes, between legal certainty and justice, between written law and living law in society, as well as between national values and values universal.
The Criminal Code, a legacy of the Dutch colonial era, which is still in use today, politically, the law does not yet reflect the nation’s cultural values, let alone the basic values of the State Philosophy, namely Pancasila. Therefore, all colonial legal products need to be replaced with national legal products.
The new Criminal Code has a pardon decision by the Judge, in which the Judge can decide not to impose a sentence or not by considering the lightness of the act, the perpetrator’s personal situation, in terms of justice and humanity.
The Criminal Code has a mission of decolonization which means eliminating colonial overtones in the substance of the old Criminal Code, namely realizing corrective-rehabilitative-restorative justice. Objectives and Guidelines for Sentencing (Standard of Sentencing) and contains alternative criminal sanctions. For example, punishment for supervision and social work, if not more than five years.
Next is the consolidation mission, which is to rearrange criminal provisions from the old Criminal Code and parts of the Criminal Law outside the Criminal Code as a whole with Recodification (open-limited).
The aim is to collect back the scattered rules to be compiled back into the Criminal Code.
In addition, there is also a harmonization mission as a form of adaptation and harmony in responding to the latest legal developments, without setting aside living law.
On a different occasion, the Minister of Law and Human Rights (Menkumham) Yasonna H Laoly, said that the Criminal Code had only expanded the types of punishment that could be imposed on perpetrators of criminal acts. There are three types of punishment in the new Criminal Code, namely principal punishment, additional punishment and special punishment. In sentencing, the perpetrators of criminal acts can be rewarded with basic criminal penalties and additional criminal penalties.
There are a number of additional penalties regulated in the new Criminal Code, one of which is the revocation of certain rights. Revocation of the right to hold public office in general, or certain positions. Then the right to become members of the TNI and Police.
Therefore, the new Criminal Code of course needs to realize corrective justice as well as restorative justice.
)* The author is a contributor to the Nusantar Reading Room
