Restorative Justice Paradigm
Policy Problems and Practices in the Criminal Justice System in Pontianak City
Abstract
The paradigm shift from retributive justice to restorative justice has encouraged institutional awareness that restorative justice methods are alternatives that need to be strengthened both in terms of policy and practice. This has prompted law enforcement agencies to begin drafting and enforcing restorative justice policies in the criminal case settlement process. The purpose of this research is to analyze the working process of restorative justice policies through their implementation practices in each institution that focuses on various criminal justice institutions in Pontianak City. This study will describe the factors that influence the process of working in restorative justice by elaborating on the paradigm of law enforcement officers, policies at their institutions, and their experiences and practices. The method used is normative-empirical legal research as research on law enforcement in concreto. Although the paradigm of punishment has shifted towards a restorative paradigm, the findings in the field showed frequent obstacles. First, cross-sectoral regulatory factors that regulate restorative justice mechanisms with different mechanisms. Second, the weak integration of the criminal justice system as seen in practice between the Pontianak Police and the Pontianak District Attorney Office has not shown the integration of the criminal justice system in the corridor of enforcing the principle of functional differentiation. Third, the factor of criminal law policy is overcriminalistic so it is still overshadowed by the retributive and punitive colonial paradigm. Fourth, factor in the small period of time in the prosecutor's office due to tiered assessments within the structural corridors of leadership. Fifth, the legal culture factor of society is still mostly punitive.
Keywords: Paradigm; Restorative Justice; Criminal Justice System
References
Akbari, Anugerah Rizki. Potret Kriminalisasi Pasca Reformasi Dan Urgensi Reklasifikasi Tindak Pidana Di Indonesia. Jakarta: Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, 2015.
Arafat, Yasser. “Penyelesaian Perkara Delik Aduan Dengan Perspektif Restorative Justice.” Borneo Law Review 1, no. 2 (2017): 127–45. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.35334/bolrev.v1i2.714.
Dianto, Mohamad Aris Dianto Aris, and Mulyadi Alrianto Tajuddin. “Analisis Pelaksanaan Prapenuntutan Dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Pidana Dikaitkan Dengan Asas Peradilan Cepat, Sederhana, Dan Biaya Ringan.” Jurnal Restorative Justice 2, no. 1 (2018): 29–37. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.35724/jrj.v2i1.1922.
Duff, R. A. Punishment, Communication, and Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Fadhil, Moh. “Kebijakan Kriminal Dalam Mengatasi Kelebihan Kapasitas (Overcrowded) Di Lembaga Pemasyarakatan.” Al-Daulah: Jurnal Hukum Pidana Dan Ketatanegaraan 9, no. 2 (2020): 168–86. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24252/ad.v9i2.15996.
Friedman, Lawrence M. Sistem Hukum Perspektif Ilmu Sosial. Bandung: Nusa Media, 2013.
Gerber, Monica M., and Jonathan Jackson. “Retribution as Revenge and Retribution as Just Deserts.” Social Justice Research 26, no. 1 (2013): 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-012-0174-7.
Kejaksaan Negeri. “Wawancara Jaksa Penuntut Umum Kejaksaan Negeri Pontianak.” 2022.
Koritansky, Peter Karl. “Retributive Justice and Natural Law.” The Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review 83, no. 3 (2019): 407–35. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1353/tho.2019.0026.
Mayer, Bernie. “Conflict Resolution for the Helping Professions: Negotiation, Mediation, Advocacy, Facilitation, and Restorative Justice. 3rd Ed.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work 38, no. 4 (2018): 446–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2018.1489656.
Muhaimin. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Mataram: Mataram University Press, 2020.
Mulyadi, Lilik. “Mediasi Penal Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia: Pengkajian Asas, Norma, Teori Dan Praktik.” Yustisia Jurnal Hukum 2, no. 1 (2013): 2. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v2i1.11054.
Osgood, Jeffrey M. “Is Revenge About Retributive Justice, Deterring Harm, or Both?” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 11, no. 1 (2016): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12296.
Pohan, Husein, Madiasa Ablisar, Marlina Marlina, and Mohammad Ekaputra. “Penyelesaian Tindak Pidana Dengan Pendekatan Restorative Justice Yang Dilakukan Oleh Kejaksaan (Studi Kasus Di Kejaksaan Negeri Medan).” Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum 2, no. 1 (2022): 270–280.
Polresta, Penyidik. “Wanwancara Dengan Penyidik Polresta.” 2022.
Prasetyo, Teguh. “Penerapan Diversi Terhadap Tindak Pidana Anak Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak.” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 9, no. 1 (2015): 1–14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24246/jrh.2015.v9.i1.p1-14.
Prayitno, Kuat Puji. “Restorative Justice Untuk Peradilan Di Indonesia (Perspektif Yuridis Filosofis Dalam Penegakan Hukum In Concreto).” Jurnal Dinamika Hukum 12, no. 3 (2012): 407–20. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.20884/1.jdh.2012.12.3.116.
Probosiwi, Ratih, and Daud Bahransyaf. “Pecandu Narkoba, Antara Penjara Atau Rehabilitasi.” Sosio Informa : Kajian Permasalahan Sosial Dan Usaha Kesejahteraan Sosial 19, no. 1 (2014): 1–19. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.33007/inf.v19i1.23.
Ridwan, Ridwan. “Relasi Hukum Dan Moral Perspektif Imperative Categories.” Jurnal Fundamental: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 10, no. 1 (2021): 18–32. https://doi.org/10.34304.
Santosa, I Kadek Darma, Ni Putu Rai Yuliartini, and Dewa Gede Sudika Mangku. “Pengaturan Asas Oportunitas Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Undiksha 9, no. 1 (2021): 70–80.
Satria, Hariman. “Restorative Justice: Paradigma Baru Peradilan Pidana.” Media Hukum 25, no. 1 (2018): 111–23. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18196/jmh.2018.0107.111-123.
Sihombing, Dedy Chandra, Alvi Syahrin, Madiasa Ablisar, and Mahmud Mulyadi. “Penguatan Kewenangan Jaksa Selaku Dominus Litis Sebagai Upaya Optimalisasi Penegakan Hukum Pidana Berorientasi Keadilan Restoratif.” Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum 2, no. 1 (2022): 281–293.
Sulhin, Iqrak. Diskontinuitas Penologi Punitif, Sebuah Analisis Genealogis Terhadap Pemenjaraan. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2016.
Waluyo, Bambang. “Relevansi Doktrin Restorative Justice Dalam Sistem Pemidanaan Di Indonesia.” Hasanuddin Law Review 1, no. 2 (2015): 210–26. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v1i2.80.
Weitekamp, Elmar G. M., and Stephan Parmentier. “Restorative Justice as Healing Justice: Looking Back to the Future of the Concept.” Restorative Justice 4, no. 2 (2016): 141–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/20504721.2016.1197517.
Wenzel, Michael, Tyler G. Okimoto, Norman T. Feather, and Michael J. Platow. “Retributive and Restorative Justice.” Law Hum Behav 32, no. 5 (2008): 375–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-007-9116-6.
Zulfa, Eva Achjani. “Pergeseran Paradigma Pemidanaan Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 36, no. 3 (2006): 389–403. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol36.no3.1256.
The authors of a work hold the copyright and grant the Al-Daulah: Jurnal Hukum Pidana dan Ketatanegaraan the right of first publication. The work is also licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which enables others to share the work while acknowledging the authorship and initial publication in the journal. The authors can make separate contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work, such as by posting it to an institutional repository or editing it for a book, with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal. Authors are allowed and encouraged to post their work online, such as in institutional repositories or on their website, before and during the submission process. This can lead to productive exchanges and greater citation of the published work.
