The Existence and Application of The Principle of Judge's Forgiveness (Rechterlijk Pardon/Judicial Pardon) In Criminal Law and Court Decisions
Keywords:
Judge's principle of forgiveness, Criminal Law, Judgment CourtAbstract
In the practice of criminal justice, judges sometimes find cases that are minor in nature and do not have a significant impact on society, which socially, are considered unnecessary for punishment, but are still punished because there is no regulation that authorizes judges to forgive these types of cases. The formulation of the problems in writing this thesis, namely; First, to understand the principle of judge forgiveness (rechterlijk pardon/judicial pardon) in criminal law and second, to understand the application of the principle of judge forgiveness in court decisions. This type of research is normative juridical, which emphasizes legal principles and legal comparisons. The data sources used include primary data, secondary data, and tertiary data. Data collection techniques using the literature study method. From the results of the problem research, there are two main things that can be concluded. First, that the principle of judge forgiveness (rechtelijk pardon/judicial pardon) is explicitly regulated in 2 (two) criminal law regulations although it is still not regulated comprehensively and completely. Second, that in court decisions made by judges, there are differences in the application of the principle of judge forgiveness (rechtelijk pardon/judicial pardon) and not all are in accordance with the formulation regulated in the criminal law. The author suggests, First, that the regulation regarding the concept of the principle of judge forgiveness (rechterlijk pardon/judicial pardon) be regulated more fully and comprehensively. Second, to encourage judges to be able to use the principle of judge forgiveness (rechterlijk pardon/judicial pardon) objectively and in accordance with the formulations stipulated in the criminal law that regulates it.
References
Adery Ardhan Saputro, ‘Konsepsi Rechterlijk Pardon Atau Pemaafan Hakim Dalam Rancangan KUHP’, Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, 28.1 (2016)
Alfret, and Mardian Outra Frans, ‘Konsep Putusan Pemaaf Oleh Hakim’, KRTHA Bhayangkara, 17.3 (2023)
Antonius Sudirman, Hati Nurani Hakim Dan Putusannya. Sebuah Pendekatan Dari Perspektif Ilmu Hukum Prilaku (Behavioral Jurisprudence) Kasus Hakim Bismar Siregar (Citra Aditya Bakti, 2007)
Cassilas, Anggian, and Rugun Romaida Hutabarat, ‘Prinsip Individualisasi Pidana Dalam Penempatan Narapidana Berdasarkan Jenis Kejahatan’, 6.2 (2024), pp. 6473–79
Et.al, Maidina Rahmawati, ‘Peluang Dan Tantangan Penerapan Restorative Justice Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Di Indonesia’
Evandy, Aristo, A. Barlian, and Barda Nawawi Arief, ‘Formulasi Ide Permaafan Hakim (Rechterlijk Pardon) Dalam Pembaharuan Sistem Pemidanaan Di Indonesia’, 13.1 (2017)
Kai, Muh. Iksan Putra, Dian Ekawaty Ismail, and Suwitno Yutye Imran, ‘Asas Pemaafan Hakim Dalam Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Di Indonesia’, Doktrin: Jurnal Dunia Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik, 2.1 (2024)
Kasmanto Rinaldi, Dinamika Kejahatan Dan Pencegahannya ( Potret Beberapa Kasus Kejahatan Di Provinsi Riau) (Ahlimedia Press, 2022)
Musa, M., Bunga Rampai Horizon Hukum Dalam Sistem Hukum Nasional (LeutikaPrio, 2020)
Nurini Aprilianda, ‘Menggali Makna Pemaafan Hakim Bagi Anak Melalui Ratio Legis Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak’, Jurnal Arena Hukum, 16.2 (2023)
Rato, Indi Muhtar Ismail Dominikus, and Bayu Dwi Anggono, ‘Kepastian Hukum Penerapan Asas Rechterlijk Pardon Pada Putusan Perkara Pidana’, Jurnal Humani (Hukum Dan Masyarakat Madani), 13.2 (2023)
Rohayati, Dewi, ‘Pengaturan Yudisial Pardon Dalam Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana’, Jurnal Wacana Paramarta, 15.2 (2016)
Syahputra, Adery, ‘Tinjauan Atas Non-Imposing of a Penalty/ Rechterlijk Pardon/ Dispensa de Pena Dalam R KUHP Serta Harmonisasinya Dengan R KUHAP’, Institue for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR), 2016