NON LITIGATION AS A SETTLEMENT IN THE JUSTICE MODEL OF HANDLING CHILDREN AS VICTIMS

CHILDREN MANAGEMENT STUDY OF MEDAN POLRESTABES)

Authors

  • Surya Nita Surya Sekolah Kajian Stratejik Global Universitas Indonesia
  • Rahul Fakultas Sosial Sains, Universitas Pembangunan Panca Budi Medan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30997/jhd.v9i2.6792

Keywords:

Settlement, criminal case, out of court, victim, child

Abstract

Justice of the peace is a peaceful effort or solving criminal cases outside the court used by law enforcement to realize the purpose of law for victims and accused of criminal acts. Justice of the peace is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code, but this rule has been regulated in the police, the prosecutor's office and the juvenile criminal justice system. Need to do a first analysis of how the legal basis of Justice of the peace by law enforcement in an effort to provide a sense of justice for victims in the Criminal Procedure Law system in Indonesia?. Second, How does justice of the peace as an effort to provide a sense of justice for victims of child abuse case study in Medan Polrestabes?. The research method is normative juridical by analyzing the rule of law related to restorative justice and case studies of child abuse in Medan Polrestabes. That the regulated Justice of the peace has fulfilled the legal purpose and legal basis of restorative justice in the police with “Perpol No. 8 of 2021 in the settlement of criminal cases in the handling of investigations, the Indonesian prosecutor's regulation in the termination of prosecutions, the Supreme Court issued rules in terms of guidance on using non-litigation settlement from the investigation stage, prosecution to the trial process. That analyze restorative justice case study of child abuse in Medan Polrestabes the peace process is an agreement taken for the benefit of the victim, not the interests of the perpetrator in order to meet the legal objectives of certainty, justice and benefit for the victim.

References

Djanggih, H. (2018). Konsepsi Perlindungan Hukum bagi Anak Sebagai Korban Kejahatan Siber Melalui Pendekatan Penal dan Non Penal. Mimbar Hukum - Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada, 30(2), 316. https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.32017

Drani, F. N. (2020). Penyelesaian Korupsi dengan menggunakan Keadilan Perdamaian. Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 20(4), 605. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2020.v20.605-

Meyrina, S. A. (2017). Restorative Justice dalam Peradilan Anak Berdasarkan Undang-Undang No.11 Tahun 2012. Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 17(1), 92. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2017.v17.92-107

Muhaimin, M. (2019). Keadilan Perdamaian dalam Penyelesaian Tindak Pidana Ringan. Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 19(2), 185. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2019.v19.185-206

Prameswari, Z. W. A. W. (2017). Ratifikasi Konvensi Tentang Hak-Hak Anak Dalam Sistem Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Di Indonesia. Yuridika, 32(1), 167. https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v32i1.4842

W.S.L, 2007, Restorative Justice The evidence, London, Esme For Brairn.

Theo. G, 2007, Restorative Justice Theory and Practice Addresing The Discrepancy, Helsinki, European Institute For Crime Prevention and Control affiliated with United Nation.

B. Peraturan Perundang-Undangan

Peraturan Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia No. 15 Tahun 2020 Tentang Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif.

Perpol No 8 Tahun 2021 Tentang Penanganan Tindak Pidana Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif.

Perma No. 4 Tahun 2014 tentang Pedoman pelaksanaan diversi dalam sistem peradilan anak.

C. Sumber Lainnya

Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Padangsidimpuan Nomor : 89/Pid.Sus/2015/PN. Psp.

Septiani, E. (2020). Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Anak Korban Penganiayaan Berat Yang Dilakukan Oleh Anak (Suatu Penelitian di Wilayah Hukum Pengadilan Negeri Banda Aceh). 4(1), 97–105.

Downloads

Published

2023-09-26

How to Cite

Surya, S. N., & Fikri, R. A. F. (2023). NON LITIGATION AS A SETTLEMENT IN THE JUSTICE MODEL OF HANDLING CHILDREN AS VICTIMS : CHILDREN MANAGEMENT STUDY OF MEDAN POLRESTABES). Jurnal Hukum DE’RECHTSSTAAT, 9(2), 61–70. https://doi.org/10.30997/jhd.v9i2.6792
Abstract viewed = 19 times