Paradigm Shift of Criminal Punishment towards Restorative Justice in Law Enforcement Officers in Pontianak City
Keywords:
Restorative justice, Paradigm, Law enforcementAbstract
Some of the challenges of law enforcement, including the retributive paradigm rooted due to colonial criminal law policies, overcriminalistic criminal law policies, overcapacity conditions in detention centers and prisons, the concept of restorative justice that is still regulated sectorally, and inadequate law enforcement capacity in restorative justice mechanisms, are some of the factors that influence the application of restorative justice. Nevertheless, law enforcement officers in Pontianak City still strive for restorative justice as the main preference. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine the paradigm shift of law enforcement officers towards restorative justice. The method used is empirical normative research with a conceptual approach and a sociological approach. The results of the study explain that the paradigm shift of law enforcement officers in Pontianak City can be seen in three paradigm models, namely postpositivism, critical and constructivism. The positivism paradigm can be seen in the attitude of law enforcement officers who actively offer restorative justice to the parties. The critical paradigm also grows in certain cases due to law enforcement officers' awareness of structural and gender inequality. The last, the constructivist paradigm was emerged from the activities of judges in interpreting the law against defendants who were threatened with the death penalty.
References
Anggara, Supriyadi Widodo Eddyono, and Ajeng Gandini Kamilah. Distribusi Ancaman Pidana Dalam R KUHP Dan Implikasinya. Jakarta: Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, 2016.
Arofa, Endi. “Penghentian Penuntutan Dalam Perkara Pidana Berdasarkan Restorative Justice.” Jurnal Surya Kencana Dua: Dinamika Masalah Hukum dan Keadilan 7, no. 2 (2020): 319–338.
Braithwaite, John. Restorative Justice & Responsive Regulation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Dignan, James. Understanding Victims and Restorative Justice. Berkshire: Open University Press, 2005.
Guba, Egon G. The Paradigm Dialog. California: Sage Publications, Inc., 1990.
Hiariej, Eddy O.S. Prinsip-Prinsip Hukum Pidana: Edisi Revisi. Yogyakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka, 2016.
Hilman, Didi, and Latifah Ratnawaty. “Membangun Moral Berkeadilan Dalam Penegakan Hukum Di Indonesia.” Yustisi Jurnal Hukum dan Hukum Islam 4, no. 1 (2017): 59–65.
Indarti, Erlyn. “Diskresi Dan Paradigma Sebuah Telaah Filsafat Hukum.” Universitas Diponegoro, 2010.
Kania, Dede. “Pidana Penjara Dalam Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Indonesia.” Yustisia Jurnal Hukum 4, no. 1 (2015): 55–72.
Kesuma, Ulfa, and Ahmad Wahyu Hidayat. “Pemikiran Thomas S. Kuhn Teori Revolusi Paradigma.” Islamadina: Jurnal Pemikiran Islam 21, no. 2 (2020): 166–187.
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Fourth Edi. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2012.
Liebmann, Marian. Restorative Justice How It Works. London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2007.
Lubis, R. Karlina. “Pancasila: Paradigma Ilmu Hukum Indonesia.” In Kongres Pancasila VI: Penguatan, Sinkronisasi, Harmonisasi, Integrasi Pelembagaan Dan Pembudayaan Pancasila Dalam Rangka Memperkokoh Kedaulatan Bangsa, 421–437. Ambon: Pusat Studi Pancasila Universitas Gadjah Mada dan Universitas Pattimura Ambon, 2014.
Maryati, Maryati. “Pergeseran Paradigma Hukum Dari Hukum Positif Menuju Hukum Progresif.” Jurnal Lex Specialis 12, no. Desember (2010): 30–41.
Muhaimin. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Mataram: Mataram University Press, 2020.
Negeri, Hakim Pengadilan. “Wawancara Dengan Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Pontianak,” 2022.
Ness, Daniel W. Van, and Karen Heetderks Strong. Restoring Justice: An Introduction to Restorative Justice. Fifth Edit. Waltham, Massachusetts: Anderson Publishing, Elsevier, 2015.
Pontianak, Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Kelas IIA. Laporan Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah (LAKIP). Pontianak, 2020.
Pradityo, Randy. “Restorative Justice Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak.” Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan 5, no. 3 (2016): 319–330.
Prasetyo, Teguh. “Penerapan Diversi Terhadap Tindak Pidana Anak Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak.” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 9, no. 1 (2015): 1–14.
Rahardjo, Satjipto. Hukum Dalam Jagat Ketertiban Bacaan Mahasiswa Program Doktor Ilmu Hukum Universitas Diponegoro. Jakarta: UKI Press, 2006.
Salamor, Anna Maria, Juanrico Alfaromona Sumarezs Titahelu, Erwin Ubwarin, and Iqbal Taufik. “Application of Restorative Justice In The Settlement of Customary Criminal Cases.” SASI 29, no. 2 (2023): 226–232.
Setyorini, Erny Herlin, Evi Kongres, Asri Gresmelian Eurike Hailitik, and Pandu Satriawan Zainulla. “The Effectiveness of Diversion Through Restorative Justice For Handling Children In The East Java Police.” SASI 29, no. 1 (2023): 59–74.
Sidharta, B. Arief. “Sebuah Gagasan Tentang Paradigma Ilmu Hukum Indonesia.” In Beberapa Pemikiran Tentang Pembangunan Sistem Hukum Nasional Indonesia: Liber Amicorum Untuk Prof. Dr. C.F.G. Sunaryati Hartono, S.H., edited by Elly Erawaty, Bayu Seto Hardjowahono, and Ida Susanti. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bhakti, 2011.
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.
Tutik, Titik Triwulan. “Ilmu Hukum: Hakekat Keilmuannya Ditinjau Dari Sudut Filsafat Ilmu Dan Teori Ilmu Hukum.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 44, no. 2 (2014): 245–268.
Zulfa, Eva Achjani. “Pergeseran Paradigma Pemidanaan Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 36, no. 3 (2006): 389–403.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Moh fadhil
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright and grant the proceeding the right of first publication. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 that allows others to share work with an acknowledgement of the works authorship and initial publication in this proceeding.
All articles in this proceeding may be disseminated by listing valid sources, and the article's title should not be omitted. The content of the article is liable to the author.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the proceeding's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this proceeding.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
In the dissemination of articles, the author must declare the Proceedings of Malikussaleh International Conference on Law, Legal Studies and Social Science (MICoLLS) as the first party to publish the article.
