Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif Ditinjau Dari Aspek Kepastian Hukum dan Keadilan

Abstract

In practice, it is undeniable that the criminal justice system is considered successful if law enforcement is able to bring criminals to court for punishment. However, in many cases it turns out that the public often wants that in certain cases the prosecution does not need to be carried out by the Prosecutor's Office because they view that the prosecution is not commensurate (unfair), compared to the violation of the law. With the existence of Perja Number 15 of 2020, which used to be sentencing as the only way to settle cases, now there are other, more humane alternatives, through cessation of prosecution. This policy of stopping prosecution opens a legal space according to law for perpetrators and victims to jointly formulate problem solving in order to restore to its original state before the criminal law prosecution effort was carried out so that with the birth of Perja Number 15 of 2020 it is hoped that it will provide justice, order and justice. legal certainty for the community. The method used in this research is the normative juridical method with a law and case approach, the nature of the research is descriptive with secondary data sources. It can be concluded, from the aspect of legal certainty, the product from the Perja is still weak because it is only in the form of a Decision on Termination of Prosecution, it is very possible to be sued to the court through the pre-trial route on the basis of the consideration that the qualifications of criminal acts that are the domain of the Perja are not limited to complaint offenses. just. The norms contained in Perja Number 15 of 2020 concerning Termination of Prosecution Based on Restorative Justice have not been able to guarantee the implementation of fair handling of cases for the community, the existence of this law opens up space for disparities in handling cases because in Perja Number 15 of 2020 there is no norms that bind the public prosecutor because everything depends on the subjective judgment of the public prosecutor.