Analisis Pro dan Kontra Restorative Justice Dalam Penyelenggaraan Sistem Keadilan di Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31316/jk.v7i2.5627Abstract
Abstrak
Penelitian ini menyoroti kurangnya efektivitas penyelenggaraan pemerintahan dan pengadilan di Indonesia yang mendorong resolusi dalam mengadopsi Restorative Justice sebagai solusi lebih efektif dalam penyelesaian perkara peradilan. Namun solusi ini dipandang memiliki sisi baik dan sisi buruknya juga. Penelitian memunculkan pandangan pro dan kontra dalam masyarakat hukum. Penelitian menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yuridis dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach), peneliti mengkaji implementasi Restorative Justice secara menyeluruh. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Restorative Justice berfokus pada pendekatan pemulihan daripada pembalasan. Meskipun demikian, penerapannya belum sepenuhnya berhasil dalam lingkup peradilan di Indonesia. Terdapat dua pandangan yang kuat: Pro Restorative Justice menyebutkan manfaatnya dalam menyelesaikan Over Capacity di lapas, menciptakan keadilan monodualistik, dan meningkatkan efisiensi penegak hukum. Sementara itu, pihak kontra berpendapat bahwa Restorative Justice berpotensi memberi peluang bagi pelaku untuk mengulangi tindak pidana, kurang memberikan perlindungan kepada korban, dan minim pemahaman masyarakat terhadap konsepnya.
Kata Kunci: Restorative Justice, Pro-Kontra, Keadilan & Peradilan
Abstract
This research highlights the lack of effectiveness of government and court administration in Indonesia which encourages resolutions in adopting Restorative Justice as a more effective solution in resolving judicial cases. However, this solution is seen as having both good sides and bad sides. Research raises views of the pros and cons in the legal community. Research uses the normative juridical research methods with a statutory approach and a case approach, where researchers examine the implementation of Restorative Justice as a whole. The research results show that Restorative Justice focuses on a recovery approach rather than retaliation. However, its implementation has not been completely successful in the judiciary in Indonesia. There are two strong views: Pro-Restorative Justice states its benefits in resolving overcapacity in prisons, creating monodualistic justice, and increasing the efficiency of law enforcement. Meanwhile, opposing parties argue that Restorative Justice has the potential to provide opportunities for perpetrators to repeat criminal acts, provides less protection for victims, and lacks public understanding of the concept.
Keywords: Restorative Justice, Pro-Con, Justice & Judiciary
References
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Aisah. (2015). Eksistensi Pidana Denda Menurut Sistem KUHP, Lex Crimen Vol. IV/No. 1/Jan-Mar/2015. https://doi.org/https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/3236-ID-eksistensi-pidana-denda-menurut-sistem-kuhp.pdf.
Anonim, Daftar Artis Terjerat Narkoba Berujung Rehabilitasi, Diakses melalui https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20210709123814-12-665405/daftar-artis-terjera-narkoba-berujung-rehabilitasi.
Anonim, Menteri PANRB 289 Dipenjara Karena Kasus Narkoba di 2016, Diakses melalui https://www.liputan6.com/bisnis/raead/2944546/menteri-panrb-289-pns-dipenjara-karena-kasus-narkoba-di-2016.
Databoks, 10 Provinsi Paling Rawan Kejahatan di Indonesia, diakses melalui https://databoks.katadata.co.id/datapublish/2022/11/29/10-provinsi-paling-rawan-kejahatan-di-indonesia.
G. Widiartana dan Aloysius Wisnubroto, Pembaharuan Hukum Acara Pidana, Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2005.
Irwan, I., Wira Perdana, F., Lumban Tungkup, D., Miran, M., & Suteki, S. (2022). Hukum Tajam
K. Prayogo, L.Resti, & P. Restika (2015). Penegakan Hukum Melalui Restorative Justice Yang Ideal Sebagai Upaya Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban. GEMA, Th. XXVII/49/Agustus 2014- Januari 2015.
ke Bawah Tumpul Ke Atas (Perspektif Sosiologis penegakan hukum di Indonesia). Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains, 3(6), 1026–1034. https://doi.org/10.36418/jiss.v3i6.672.
Lilik Mulyadi, Hukum Acara Pidana, Jakarta: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2007.
Muhaimin, Metode Penelitian Hukum, UPT Mataram: University Press, 2020.
Munir Fuady, Aliran Hukum Kritis Paradigma Ketidakberdayaan Hukum, Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2003.
Nurkasihani, SH, I. (2019). Putusan Pengadilan. Restorative Justice, Alternatif Baru Dalam Sistem Pemidanaan. https://www.jdih.tanahlautkab.go.id/artikel_hukum/detail/restorative-justice-alternatif-baru-dalam-sistem-pemidanaan.
Peraturan Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 Tentang Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif. Berita Negara Nomor 811 Tahun 2020.
Peraturan Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2021 Tentang Penanganan Tindak Pidana Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif. Berita Negara Nomor 947 Tahun 2021.
Rafsanjani, J. I., Prasetio, R. B., & Anggayudha, Z. H. (2023). Eksistensi Pidana Kerja Sosial Dalam Perspektif Hukum Progresif. Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 23(2), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2023.v23.219-230.
Rahadian, T. (2022, July 15). Apa Itu Pidana Denda? Ini Penjelasannya. https://kumparan.com/kumparannews/apa-itu-pidana-denda-ini-penjelasannya-1yT2ctWlU6M/full.
Sugiyono. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D, Bandung: Alfabeta, 2015.
Sutiyoso, B. (2010). Mencari Format ideal Keadilan Putusan Dalam Peradilan. JURNAL HUKUM IUS QUIA IUSTUM, 17(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol17.iss2.art5.
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana. Lembaran Negara Nomor 76 Tahun 1981, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 3209.
Undang-undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 16 Tahun 2011 Tentang Bantuan Hukum. Lembaran Negara Nomor 104 Tahun 2011, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 5248.
Walukow, J. M. (2013). Perwujudan Prinsip equality before the law bagi narapidana di Dalam Lembaga Pemasyarakatan di Indonesia. LEX ET SOCIETATIS, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.35796/les.v1i1.1320.
Zehr, H. (2010). Social Work and Restorative Justice. Restorative Justice Blog. https://emu-edu.translate.goog/now/restorative-justice/2010/10/31/social-work-and-restorative-justice/?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=id&_x_tr_hl=id&_x_tr_pto=tc.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 R. Rahaditya, Cora Venessa, Okthavianes Paulina, Eudora Joyce Hiumawan, Erland Jovian

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
-
The journal allow the authors to hold the copyright without restrictions and allow the authors to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
-
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional.