Penerapan Pidana Pengganti Dalam Pembayaran Restitusi Terhadap Anak Korban Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual

In Perma Number 1 of 2022 concerning Procedures for Settlement of Applications and Granting of Restitution and Compensation to Victims of Criminal Acts, the concept of substitute punishment has actually been accommodated by providing space by regulating it partially. In addition, seen from the perspective of systematic interpretation and interdisciplinary interpretation, there are several laws that regulate substitute punishment for restitution, one of which is the provision of Article 33 paragraph (7) of Law Number 12 of 2022 concerning Criminal Acts of Sexual Violence. However, in practice, perpetrators of criminal acts who are required to pay restitution based on a court decision that has permanent legal force, state that they refuse to pay restitution on the grounds that they cannot afford it so that they serve a subsidiary sentence because they do not pay restitution. Then the problem is that the subsidiary sentence that they must undergo is often not commensurate with the actions or the value of the restitution that must be paid, so that perpetrators of criminal acts prefer to serve a substitute sentence rather than pay restitution. Methods used in this study This study uses descriptive analytical research, which is carried out with the main aim of providing an objective picture or description of a situation. With the statute approach, case approach, conceptual approach, analytical approach. The results of the study recommend that in the form of efforts to ensure the fulfillment of the rights of victims of sexual violence in the form of restitution, there needs to be rules or guidelines for judges in deciding on substitute (subsidiary) punishment for restitution, so that the judge's decision has coercive power and has uniformity. From the perspective of the victim, restitution is used to restore the victim's condition to the state before the crime occurred. Meanwhile, from the perpetrator's side, payment of restitution is a form of accountability for the occurrence of the crime. Although restitution is a form of accountability for the perpetrator, there are no rules or guidelines that confirm/regulate the provision of substitute (subsidiary) punishment if restitution is not paid by the perpetrator to the victim

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
CENDEKIA Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengkajian Ilmiah
Published
2025-02-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.62335/cendekia.v2i2.968
Primary Topic
Legal and Social Justice Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Penerapan Pidana Pengganti Dalam Pembayaran Restitusi Terhadap Anak Korban Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual

Anisa Roshda Diana, Maryano Maryano, Tofik Yanuar Chandra
CENDEKIA Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengkajian Ilmiah
Legal and Social Justice Studies
article

Penerapan Pidana Pengganti Dalam Pembayaran Restitusi Terhadap Anak Korban Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual

Anisa Roshda Diana, Maryano Maryano, Tofik Yanuar Chandra
article en

Abstract

In Perma Number 1 of 2022 concerning Procedures for Settlement of Applications and Granting of Restitution and Compensation to Victims of Criminal Acts, the concept of substitute punishment has actually been accommodated by providing space by regulating it partially. In addition, seen from the perspective of systematic interpretation and interdisciplinary interpretation, there are several laws that regulate substitute punishment for restitution, one of which is the provision of Article 33 paragraph (7) of Law Number 12 of 2022 concerning Criminal Acts of Sexual Violence. However, in practice, perpetrators of criminal acts who are required to pay restitution based on a court decision that has permanent legal force, state that they refuse to pay restitution on the grounds that they cannot afford it so that they serve a subsidiary sentence because they do not pay restitution. Then the problem is that the subsidiary sentence that they must undergo is often not commensurate with the actions or the value of the restitution that must be paid, so that perpetrators of criminal acts prefer to serve a substitute sentence rather than pay restitution. Methods used in this study This study uses descriptive analytical research, which is carried out with the main aim of providing an objective picture or description of a situation. With the statute approach, case approach, conceptual approach, analytical approach. The results of the study recommend that in the form of efforts to ensure the fulfillment of the rights of victims of sexual violence in the form of restitution, there needs to be rules or guidelines for judges in deciding on substitute (subsidiary) punishment for restitution, so that the judge's decision has coercive power and has uniformity. From the perspective of the victim, restitution is used to restore the victim's condition to the state before the crime occurred. Meanwhile, from the perpetrator's side, payment of restitution is a form of accountability for the occurrence of the crime. Although restitution is a form of accountability for the perpetrator, there are no rules or guidelines that confirm/regulate the provision of substitute (subsidiary) punishment if restitution is not paid by the perpetrator to the victim

CENDEKIA Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengkajian IlmiahVol. 2(2)
Universitas Jayabaya (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Legal and Social Justice Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.