Implications of Renewal System of Criminal Justice Based on the Principles of Restorative Justice on The Role of Probation and Parole Officer

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Mar 15, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15575/kh.v4i1.17354
Keywords:
Probation and Parole Officers, Criminal Law Reform, Restorative Justice, Correctional

Main Article Content

Moch. Fauzan Zarkasi
Hasanuddin University, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of Republic Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3705-987X
Nur Azisa
Hasanuddin University, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of Republic Indonesia
Haeranah Haeranah
Hasanuddin University, Ministry of Law and Human Rights of Republic Indonesia

Abstract

In Indonesia, criminal law reform is manifested in plans to amend several laws and regulations, including the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, and the Correctional Law. In addition, several criminal justice sub-systems have issued policy regulations that put forward the principle of penal mediation to accommodate the limitations or shortcomings of formal criminal law in resolving criminal cases. These various steps of change put forward a value known as restorative justice. The concept of restorative justice, which contains two main principles, namely participation, and recovery, always requires the role of Probation and Parole Officer as stated in the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. The formulation of the following research problem is how the implications of reforming the criminal justice system based on the principles of restorative justice on the role of the Probation and Parole Officers. The purpose of this study was to determine the projected implications of reforming the criminal justice system based on the principles of restorative justice on the role of Probation and Parole Officers. This research is descriptive normative legal research. The results of the study indicate that Probation and Parole Officers have the potential to obtain strengthening of duties and functions in particular from the three main aspects of reform, namely strengthening alternative disposal, the existence of sentencing guidelines, as well as supervision and guidance in the implementation of various types of punishments and treatments. The expansion of these tasks and functions indicates the urgency of optimizing the fulfillment of technical and facilitative needs for the Probation and Parole Officers.

Article Details

Issue
Vol. 4 No. 1 (2022): Khazanah Hukum Vol.4 No.1 April (2022)
Section
Articles

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. 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 acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. 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).

References

Akub, S., & Baharu, B. (2012). Wawasan Due Process of Law dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Yogyakarta: Rangkang Education.

Akub, S., & Sutiawati. (2018). Keadilan Restoratif (Restorative Justice) Perkembangan Program Serta Prakteknya di Indonesia dan Beberapa Negara. Yogyakarta: Litera (Republik Institute.

Arief, B. N. (2017). Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Kencana.

Azisa, N. (2016). Nilai Keadilan Terhadap Jaminan Kompensasi Bagi Korban Kejahatan (Sebuah Kajian Filosofis - Normatif). Makassar: Pustaka Pena Press.

Bullock, K., & Bunce, A. (2020). The Prison Dont Talk to You About Getting Out of Prison: On Why Prison in England and Wales Fail to Rehabilitate Prisoner. Journal Criminology & Criminal Justice, Vol. 20(I), 111-127. doi:10.1177/1748895818800743

Clamp, K. (2013). Restorative Justice in Transition. Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge. doi:https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203715192

Cullen, F. T., & Gendreau, P. (2001). From Nothing Works to What Works: Changing Professional Ideology in 21st Century. The Prison Journal, Vol. 81(3), 313-338.

doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885501081003002

Fishbein D.H. (2002). Biocriminology Encyclopedia of Crime And Punishment Vol. I. CA: Sage Publications.

Gunarto, M. P. (2012). Asas Keseimbangan dalam Konsep Rancangan Undang-Undang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, 24 Nomor 1, 84-97. doi:https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.16143

Haeranah, & Amriyanto. (2020). Ganti Kerugian dan Rehabilitasi Bentuk Perlindungan terhadap Korban Tindak Pidana dan Korban Proses Penegakan Hukum di Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum De Jure Fakultas Hukum Universitas Khairun, 2, 68-82. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.33387/dejure.v2i1.3035

Hagan, F. (2013). Pengantar Kriminologi Teori Metode dan Perilaku Kriminal. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Hutchinson, S. (2006, October 1). Countering Catastrophic Criminology: Reform, Punishment, and the Modern Liberal Compromise. Punishment and Society, Vol. 8(4), 443-467. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474506067567

Irmawanti, N. D., & Arief, B. N. (2021, May). Urgensi Tujuan dan Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Rangka Pembaharuan Sistem Pemidanaan Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia, Vol. 3(No. 2), 217-227. doi:https://doi.org/10.14710/jphi.v312.217-227

Karjoko, L., Ketut, I. A., Jaelani, A. K., Barkhuizen, J., & Hayat, M. J. (2021, December 31). The Urgency of Restorative Justice on Medical Dispute Resolution in Indonesia. Al Ihkam Jurnal Hukum dan Pranata Sosial, Vol. 16 (2), 362-392. doi:http://doi.org/10.19105/al-ihkam.v1612.5314

Khosyi'ah, S., Ghifari, R. A., Sar’an, M., & Fathonih, A. (2021). Absolute Competence in the Fields of Alms in the Religious Courts. International Journal of Islamic Khazanah, 11(2), 90-102.

Muladi. (2019). Implementasi Pendekatan Keadilan Restoratif Justice dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak. Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Universitas Diponegoro, 2 Nomor 2, 58-85.

Mustikowati, E., Akub, S., & Muchtar, S. (2014, Juni). Penyelesaian Perkara Pidana di Luar Pengadilan Tentang Keadilan Restoratif di Kepolisian Resort Banggai. Jurnal Analisis, 82-89.

Presser, L., & Voorhis, P. V. (2002). Values and Evaluation: Assessing Processes and Outcomes of Restorative Justice Programs. Journal Crime and Delinquency, 48.1, 162-188. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128702048001007

Rado, R. H., & Badilla, N. (2019). Konsep Keadilan Restoratif dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terpadu. Jurnal Restorative Justice, 3 No. 2, 149-163.

Reckless, W. C., Dinitz, S., & Murray, E. (1957). The Good Boy in a High Delinquency Era. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 48(I), 18-25.

Robinson, G. (2008, October 1). Late-modern Rehabilitation: The Evolution of a Penal Strategy. Punishment and Society, Vol. 10(4), 429-445. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474508095319

Setiadi, E., & Kristian. (2017). Sistem Peradilan Pidana Terpadu dan Sistem Penegakan Hukum di Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana.

Sofyan, A., & Azisa, N. (2016). Hukum Pidana. Makassar: Pustaka Pena.

Witanto D.Y. (2011). Hukum Acara Mediasi dalam Perkara Perdata di Lingkungan Peradilan Umum dan Peradilan Agama Menurut Perma No. 1 Tahun 2008 tentang Prosedur Mediasi di Pengadilan. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Zarkasi, M. F. (2020). Pembimbing Kemasyarakatan. Pontianak: IDE Publishing.

Zulfa, E. A., & Adji, I. S. (2011). Pergeseran Paradigma Pemidanaan. Bandung: Lubuk Agung.