Mitigating the Risk of Prosecutiontermination Based on Restorative Justice from Transactional Aspects

Authors

  • R. Muhamad Ibnu Mazjah Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Adhyaksa, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58344/jws.v3i6.635

Keywords:

risk mitigation, restorative justice, prosecution

Abstract

Restorative justice, as a manifestation of the Prosecutor's authority and discretion in controlling criminal cases, is vulnerable to abuse of authority if it is not supported by the principle of accountability and a robust supervision system. This research aims to strengthen the authority of prosecutors in applying restorative justice by strengthening regulations at the legal level and proposing stricter criteria for crimes that fall into this category. The research method used is normative legal research, which aims to find coherence between the Prosecutor's authority and legal norms, legal concepts, and legal principles through a legislative and conceptual approach. This study finds that implementing restorative justice by prosecutors requires strengthening regulations and a more muscular supervision system to prevent abuse of authority and ensure legal certainty and justice for all parties. This study implies the need for more transparent regulations and a strict monitoring system to avoid abuse of authority in the application of restorative justice by prosecutors, ensure an accountable law enforcement system, and protect human rights.

References

Asshiddiqie, J. (2022). Peradilan Etik dan Etika Konstitusi: Perspektif Baru tentang Rule of Law and Rule of Ethics & Constitutional Law and Constitutional Ethics (Edisi Revisi). Sinar Grafika.

Burhanuddin, S. (2022). Membedah Undang-Undang Kejaksaan “Kajian Terhadap Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2021 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 tentang Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia. Universitas Pancasila.

Chandranegara, I. S. (2018). Constitutional and Administrative Law Aspect on Public Service. Proceedings of The International Conference on Social Sciences (ICSS), 1(1).

Djaja, E. (2010). Meredesain pengadilan tindak pidana korupsi: implikasi putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi nomor 012-016-019/PPU-IV/2006. (No Title).

Effendy, M. (2013). Manajemen Pengawasan Melekat Sebagai Instrumen Peningkatan Disiplin dan Kinerja Aparatur Kejaksaan RI yang Profesional, Beretika, Berintegritas dan Bernurani. Diklat Manajemen Pengawasan Tahun 2013 Badan Diklat Kejaksaan RI.

Hadjon, P. M. (1993). Pengantar hukum administrasi Indonesia. Gadjah Mada University Press.

Kristian & Gunawan, Y. (2015). Tindak Pidana Korupsi: Kajian terhadap Harmonisasi antara Hukum Nasional dan United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), Cetakan Kesatu. Bandung, PT Refika Aditama.

Marzuki, P. M. (2013). Penelitian hukum.

Muntoha, A. (2009). Demokrasi dan negara hukum. Ius Quia Iustum Law Journal, 16(3), 379–395.

Parikesit, R. A. (2021). Penerapan Asas Legalitas (Legaliteit Beginsel/Wetmatigheid Van Bestuur) Dalam Kebijakan Sentralisasi Pengharmonisasian Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, 18(4), 450–459.

Prodjohamidjojo, M. (2009). Penerapan Pembuktian Terbalik Dalam Delik Korupsi. Mandar Maju.

Ridwan, H. R. (2006). Hukum administrasi negara.

Sunarso, H. S., & SH, M. H. (2023). Hukum pemerintahan daerah di Indonesia. Sinar Grafika.

Surachman, E. Q. R. M. (2022). Eksistensi Kejaksaan: dalam Konstitusi di Berbagai Negara (Edisi Kedua). Sinar Grafika.

Triwati, A. (2020). Pengesampingan Perkara Demi Kepentingan Umum Pascaputusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 6(1), 32–54.

Downloads

Published

2024-06-28

How to Cite

Ibnu Mazjah, R. M. (2024). Mitigating the Risk of Prosecutiontermination Based on Restorative Justice from Transactional Aspects . Journal of World Science, 3(6), 675–683. https://doi.org/10.58344/jws.v3i6.635