Problematika Implementasi Keadilan Restoratif dalam Tujuan Pemidanaan Pasca Berlakunya KUHP 2023
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58192/sidu.v5i1.4763Keywords:
Criminal Code 2023, Criminal Law Politics, Implementation Problems, Restorative Justice, Sentencing ObjectivesAbstract
Article 51 of the Indonesian Criminal Code 2023 formulates four cumulative sentencing objectives without hierarchy, potentially creating implementation problems for restorative justice in courts. This study aims to analyze the construction of Article 51 and the implementation problems in court decisions after the Code. Using a normative juridical method with a prescriptive-analytical approach, this research employs integrative punishment theory (Packer and Barda Nawawi Arief), restorative justice theory (Zehr), and reintegrative shaming theory (Braithwaite). Case studies are conducted on the Tanjung Pati District Court Decision (successful restorative) and the Barru District Court Decision (failed restorative). The findings reveal three layers of problems: normative (Supreme Court Regulation No. 1/2024 is not binding on judges), cultural (carceral mindset of law enforcement), and structural (disincentives from performance assessment systems). Comparison with New Zealand (FGC), Germany (TOA), and Canada (periodic evaluation) demonstrates the need for systematic reforms. This study recommends four operational policies: conditional hierarchy of objectives, measurable success indicators, revision of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1/2024, and reform of law enforcement key performance indicators. Without these changes, restorative justice in the Criminal Code 2023 will remain a symbolic declaration.
References
Ansar, N. (2024). Keadilan restoratif dalam putusan pengadilan. Jurnal Yudisial, 17(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.29123/jy.v17i1.637
Arief, B. N. (2022). Tujuan dan pedoman pemidanaan: Perspektif pembaharuan hukum pidana dan perbandingan beberapa negara.
Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804618
Dünkel, F., & Willms, C. (2023). Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich und restorative justice in Deutschland – Aktuelle Entwicklungen und kriminalpolitischer Handlungsbedarf. Neue Kriminalpolitik, 35(2), 172–189. https://doi.org/10.5771/0934-9200-2023-2-172
Edin, E., Shofiana, A., & Indar, I. J. (2025). The effectiveness of restorative justice in resolving juvenile criminal offenses in Indonesia. HAKIM: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Sosial, 3(1), 917–936. https://doi.org/10.51903/hakim.v3i1.2288
Efendi, J., & Ibrahim, J. (2016). Metode penelitian hukum: Normatif dan empiris (2nd ed.). Kencana. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=5OZeDwAAQBAJ
Elmarianti, & Aulia, N. I. (2026). Pergeseran paradigma pemidanaan Indonesia: Implikasi normatif dan tantangan implementasi keadilan restoratif dalam KUHP Nasional 2026. Al-Mizan, 21(2), 353–374. https://doi.org/10.30603/am.v21i2.7131
Faried, M. (2025). Membangun budaya hukum nasional melalui putusan hakim yang progresif. Paradoks Hukum, 1(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.64147/dokhum.v1i1.1
Hartono, C. (2025). Mediasi sebagai alternatif penyelesaian sengketa dalam hukum acara perdata dan agama di Indonesia. JIHHP: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora, dan Politik, 5(6), 5017–5029. https://doi.org/10.38035/jihhp.v5i6
Marzuki, P. M. (2005). Penelitian hukum: Edisi revisi (13th ed.). Kencana. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=CKZADwAAQBAJ
Muhaimin. (2020). Metode penelitian hukum. Mataram University Press.
Muksin, M. R. S. (2023). Tujuan pemidanaan dalam pembaharuan hukum pidana Indonesia. Jurnal Sapientia et Virtus, 8(1), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.37477/sev.v8i1.465
Packer, H. L. (1968). The limits of the criminal sanction. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804780797
Pratama, M. I. W., & Daviska, D. (2025). Penerapan pedoman pemidanaan bagi hakim sebelum diundangkannya KUHP baru. Jurnal Fakta Hukum, 4(1), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.58819/jfh.v4i1.180
Putri, D. Y., & Wahyudi. (2025). Peluang dan tantangan mediasi untuk restorative justice terhadap penyelesaian perkara pencurian. Indonesian Journal of Law and Justice, 3(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.47134/ijlj.v3i2.5209
Putusan Nomor 9/Pid.B/2026/PN Bar (2026).
Putusan PN Tanjung Pati Nomor 13/Pid.B/2026/PN Tjp (2026).
Rasiwan, I. (2025). Prinsip keadilan restoratif dalam KUHP nasional: Jalan tengah hukum pidana. DRA Cipta Kreasi.
Sariyono, E. B. (2025). Polri untuk masyarakat: Dalam paradigma pemidanaan modern berdasarkan KUHP nasional guna mewujudkan perlindungan hukum masyarakat. Proceedings of Police Academy, 1(1), 132–149.
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (1986). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat (VI). CV Rajawali.
Suriadiata, I., Taqiuddin, H. U., & Risdiana. (2026). Rasionalitas di balik putusan: Menguji pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam persidangan. Retorika: Journal of Law, Social, and Humanities, 4(2), 84–100. https://doi.org/10.69503/retorika.v4i2.1539
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (2023). https://doi.org/10.35879/jik.v18i1.445
Wood, W. R., & Tauri, J. (2025). Revisiting New Zealand’s “gift to the world”: Demythologising youth justice family group conferencing in Aotearoa New Zealand. Contemporary Justice Review, 28(2), 220–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580.2025.2519736
Zehr, H. (2015). The little book of restorative justice: Revised and updated justice and peacebuilding. Good Books.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sinar Dunia: Jurnal Riset Sosial Humaniora dan Ilmu Pendidikan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
