KEBIJAKAN MODERASI PIDANA MATI

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 2-3/PUU-V/2007 selain menjadi dasar konstitusionalitas pidana mati, juga memberikan jalan tengah (moderasi) terhadap perdebatan antara kelompok yang ingin mempertahankan (retensionis) dan yang ingin menghapus (abolisionis) pidana mati. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam putusan a quo dikaitkan dengan teori pemidanaan dan hak asasi manusia dan bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 dikaitkan dengan putusan a quo. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian doktrinal, dengan menggunakan bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, berupa peraturan perundang-undangan, literatur, dan hasil-hasil penelitian yang relevan dengan objek penelitian. Penelitian menyimpulkan, pertama, putusan a quo yang memuat kebijakan moderasi pidana mati telah sesuai dengan teori pemidanaan khususnya teori integratif dan teori hak asasi manusia di Indonesia di mana hak hidup tetap dibatasi oleh kewajiban asasi yang diatur dengan undang-undang. Kedua, model kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 beberapa di antaranya telah mengakomodasi amanat putusan a quo, seperti penentuan pidana mati di luar pidana pokok, penundaan pidana mati, kemungkinan pengubahan pidana mati menjadi pidana seumur hidup atau penjara paling lama 20 tahun. Selain itu masih menimbulkan persoalan berkaitan dengan lembaga yang memberikan pengubahan pidana mati, persoalan grasi, lamanya penundaan pelaksanaan pidana mati, dan jenis pidana apa saja yang dapat diancamkan pidana mati.Kata kunci: kebijakan, KUHP, moderasi, pidana mati. ABSTRACTConstitutional Court’s Decision Number 2-3/PUU-V/2007, in addition to being the basis of the constitutionality of capital punishment, also provides a moderate way of arguing between retentionist groups and those wishing to abolish the death penalty (abolitionist). The problem in this research is how the moderation policy of capital punishment in aquo decision is associated with the theory of punishment and human rights and how the moderation policy of capital punishment in the draft Criminal Code of 2015 (RKUHP) is related with the a quo decision. This study is doctrinal, using primary and secondary legal materials, in the form of legislation, literature and research results that are relevant to the object of analysis. This study concludes, firstly, the aquo decision containing the moderation policy of capital punishment has been in accordance with the theory of punishment, specificallyy the integrative theory and the theory of human rights in Indonesia, in which the right to life remains limited by the fundamental obligations set forth in the law. Secondly, some of the modes of moderation model of capital punishment in RKUHP of 2015 have accommodated the mandate of aquo decision, such as the determination of capital punishment outside the main punishment, postponement of capital punishment, the possibility of converting capital punishment to life imprisonment or imprisonment of 20 years. In addition, it still raises issues regarding the institutions that provide for conversion of capital punishment, pardon matters, length of delay in the execution of capital punishment, and any types of crime punishable by capital punishment. Keywords: policy, criminal code, moderation, capital punishment.

Download Full-text

KEBERADAAN PIDANA MATI DALAM KITAB UNDANG-UNDANG HUKUM PIDANA (KUHP)

Jurnal Komunikasi Hukum (JKH) ◽

10.23887/jkh.v6i1.23444 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. 104

Author(s):

Ni Komang Ratih Kumala Dewi

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Legal System ◽

Capital Punishment ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Deterrent Effect ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Right To Life ◽

The Right

Capital punishment is the heaviest crime and difficult to apply in a country of law considering the death penalty is one of the acts of human rights violations, but to make someone discourage of committing a crime there needs to be rules or penalties that can provide a deterrent effect and provide security for the community from all form of crime. The purpose of writing is directed to find out the regulation of the Death Penalty in the Criminal Law Code which is stipulated in several articles in the Criminal Code and the existence of capital punishment in the legal system in Indonesia in terms of human rights perspective, which of course would be contrary to human rights, especially the right to life, however capital punishment is also needed as an effort to prevent the occurrence of crimes, especially those classified as serious

Download Full-text

DEATH PENALTY AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE, THE 1945 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA, AND INDONESIAN LAW

Yustisia Jurnal Hukum ◽

10.20961/yustisia.v96i0.5022 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 96 ◽

Author(s):

Oksidelfa Yanto . .

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Capital Punishment ◽

Deterrent Effect ◽

General Nature ◽

Right To Life ◽

Positive Law ◽

Legal Power ◽

The Republic ◽

The Right

The execution of Death penalty in Indonesia is based on the court verdict that has had a permanent legal power. Only through the court ruling a man can be executed a death penalty upon the guilty alleged at him/her. The death penalty application in Indonesia is provided in the positive law with specific or general nature. As a country having the most verdicts with the capital punishment, either to its local citizen or to the foreign citizen who commits any offenders in the jurisdiction of Republic of Indonesia, triggering the existing of pro and contra stance on the capital punishment execution. The opposing stance based its argument on the human rights perspective, affirming that the capital punishment can be categorized as a form of savage and inhuman punishment and is in the contrary with the constitution. While the stance supporting the capital punishment execution is based on the argumentation that the perpetrator must be avenged in compliance with his/her commit, in order to give a deterrent effect for others who want to commit similar offense. Nevertheless as a matter of fact, there are still many similar offense occurred though capital punishment has been implemented. Keywords : Capital punishment, rights to live and human rights.

Download Full-text

DEATH PENALTY EXECUTION AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN PERSPECTIVE OF HUMAN RIGHTS, 1945 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA, AND INDONESIAN LAW

Yustisia Jurnal Hukum ◽

10.20961/yustisia.v5i3.8804 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 5 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Oksidelfa Yanto

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Capital Punishment ◽

Deterrent Effect ◽

General Nature ◽

Right To Life ◽

Positive Law ◽

Legal Power ◽

The Republic ◽

The Right

AbstractThe execution of Death penalty in Indonesia is based on the court verdict that has had a permanent legal power. Only through the court ruling a man can be executed a death penalty upon the guilty alleged at him/her. The death penalty application in Indonesia is provided in the positive law with specific or general nature. As a country having the most verdicts with the capital punishment, either to its local citizen or to the foreign citizen who commits any offenders in the jurisdiction of Republic of Indonesia, triggering the existing of pro and contra stance on the capital punishment execution. The opposing stance based its argument on the human rights perspective, affirming that the capital punishment can be categorized as a form of savage and inhuman punishment and is in the contrary with the constitution. While the stance supporting the capital punishment execution is based on the argumentation that the perpetrator must be avenged in compliance with his/her commit, in order to give a deterrent effect for others who want to commit similar offense. Nevertheless as a matter of fact, there are still many similar offense occurred though capital punishment has been implemented. Keywords : Capital punishment, rights to live and human rights.

Download Full-text

The Right to Life Based on Human Rights Principles: A Normative Study of the Death Penalty in Indonesia

Journal of The Community Development in Asia ◽

10.32535/jcda.v4i2.1095 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 85-95

Author(s):

Doortje Durin Turangan ◽

Emma V.T. Senewe ◽

Wempie Jh. Kumendong ◽

Jemmy Sondakh

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

The Netherlands ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Right To Life ◽

Normative Study ◽

Legal Norms ◽

Pros And Cons ◽

The Absolute ◽

The Right

The right to life is the absolute right of every person and is included in the category of rights that cannot be reduced. Indonesia is one of the countries that still maintains and recognizes the legality of the death penalty as a way to punish the perpetrators of certain criminal acts such as narcotics, terrorism, and murder crimes despite the pros and cons. This study aims to investigate the regulation of the right to life against the death penalty in Indonesia, the construction of the death penalty law from human rights viewpoint, and the judge's consideration in imposing the death penalty associated with the principles of human rights. This study used a qualitative normative juridical approach by referring to the legal norms in statutory regulations and norms of the society. The findings highlight that the early existence of the death penalty in Indonesia is legally regulated in the Criminal Code, most of which are from the Netherlands, namely WvS (Wetboek van Strafrecht).

Download Full-text

The problem of the legislative sentence to the death penalty in russia in the context of international obligations

Russian Journal of Legal Studies ◽

10.17816/rjls18035 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 153-161

Author(s):

A V Ivanov

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Capital Punishment ◽

Right To Life ◽

Council Of Europe ◽

Fundamental Freedoms ◽

Long Time ◽

International Obligations ◽

The Right

Legislative Sentence to the death penalty as an exceptional measure of capital punishment and its relation to the right to life have been a subject of public discussion for a long time, and nowadays they are topical ones for every civilized state.The International law prohibits the use of capital punishment by a country because the death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhumanand degrading punishment as well as because the legislative Sentence to the death penalty is contrary to the basic principle of respectfor human rights and fundamental freedoms including the recognition of an absolute right to human life.One of the essential conditions for invitation of Russia to the Council of Europe has been the legislative Sentence for the abolition ofthe death penalty, but Russia still has not ratified Protocol No. 6, and has not taken action on the absolute refusal of the death penalty,so the problem of the Sentence to the death penalty as a capital punishment, continues to be topical more than ever.

Download Full-text

Implementation of the Death Penalty in the Perspective of Human Rights in Indonesia

Hasanuddin Law Review ◽

10.20956/halrev.v2i3.695 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 2 (3) ◽

pp. 385

Author(s):

La Sina

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Life Imprisonment ◽

Indonesian Government ◽

Legal Provisions ◽

Death Sentences ◽

The Law ◽

The Government ◽

The Right

The 1945 Constitution of Indonesia provides for rights to life and to remain free from torture that are fundamental human rights that shall not be curtailed under any circumstance. Since 1945, Indonesia does not regulate the protection of the right of life to the citizens. Until 1946, enacted Law No. 1 of 1946 concerning the Indonesian Criminal Code which in several provisions concerning the death penalty. Death sentences and executions in Indonesia is always debatable. However, it is still implemented and can not be avoided, unless the change of its legal provisions. This study was a normative research or doctrinal research. The results of the study shows that the provisions of death penalty in Indonesia is still enforced because have been regulated in the Criminal Code and several organic laws such as the law of terrorism, narcotics, corruption, and human rights justice. The death penalty is contrary to Article 28I of the 1945 Constitution. It has set the rights to life, so that no one may violate human rights, including the government and the country is not granted the right to revoke rights for every citizen. The Indonesian government should not impose the death penalty contained in the draft new Code, and abolish the death penalty in its organic law that had been imposed on the offenders. Preferably, the death penalty may be replaced by alternative punishment with life imprisonment, a prison within a specified time or according to the judge’s decision.

Download Full-text

The ICCPR as a ‘Living Instrument’: The Death Penalty as Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

The Journal of Criminal Law ◽

10.1350/jcla.68.6.507.54143 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 68 (6) ◽

pp. 507-519 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Amrita Mukherjee

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Right To Life ◽

Degrading Treatment ◽

The Right

This article examines the recent views of the UN Human Rights Committee on the issues related to the death penalty. Obligations under Articles 6 (the right to life) and 7 (the right not to be subjected to torture or other, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment) are correlated. Despite widely divergent opinions within the Committee on the issue, this human rights body is moving towards strengthening the obligations of abolitionist states and, in so doing, restricting the availability of the sanction for retentionist states. This is consistent with the object and purposes approach and the nature of the ICCPR as a living instrument.

Download Full-text

EKSISTENSI HUKUMAN MATI DITINJAU DARI ASPEK HAM SIPIL DALAM PERSEPEKTIF HAK UNTUK HIDUP

Jurnal Hukum Saraswati (JHS) ◽

10.36733/jhshs.v3i2.2958 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

pp. 72-91

Author(s):

I Gusti Bagus Hengki

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Research Methodology ◽

Scientific Paper ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Right To Life ◽

The Republic ◽

Perpetrators And Victims ◽

The Right

This scientific paper is expected to find out how the existence of the death penalty is viewed from the aspect of Civil Human Rights in the perspective of the right to life and whether the existence of the death penalty is contrary to the ideology of the Pancasila State and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the Human Rights Law with a normative research methodology with using a statutory approach. From the results of the discussion that the existence of the death penalty in terms of the Civil Human Rights aspect in the perspective of the right to life still needs to be maintained, because it does not conflict with the ideology of the Pancasila State and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the Human Rights Law, UDHR and ICCPR, as well as religion. in Indonesia, as long as it is not carried out arbitrarily, in accordance with the provisions of the legislation. This needs to be done because to provide protection for individual perpetrators and victims against acts of revenge, emotional, uncontrollable, vigilante, so that it does not guarantee that the death penalty is abolished. Indeed, there are parties who are pro and contra about the death penalty by both underpinning Pancasila, all of which is to make Pancasila a "Justification". Tulisan ilmiah ini diharapkan dapat mengetahui bagaimana eksistensi hukuman mati ditinjau dari aspek HAM Sipil dalam perspektif hak untuk hidup dan apakah eksistensi hukuman mati bertentangan dengan ideologi Negara Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 serta Undang-Undang HAM dengan metodologi penelitian normatif dengan menggunakan jenis pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute Approach). Dari hasil pembahasan bahwa eksistensi hukuman mati ditinjau dari aspek HAM Sipil dalam perspektif Hak untuk hidup masih perlu dipertahankan, karena tidak bertentangan dengan ideologi Negara Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, Undang-Undang HAM, UDHR dan ICCPR, maupun agama yang ada di Indonesia, asal dilaksanakan tidak sewenang-wenang, sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan. Hal ini perlu diadakan karena untuk memberikan perlindungan terhadap individu pelaku dan korban terhadap tindakan balas dendam, emosional, tidak terkendali, main hakim sendiri, sehingga tidak menjamin bahwa kalau hukuman pidana mati ditiadakan. Memang ada pihak yang pro dan kontra tentang hukuman mati dengan sama-sama mendasari Pancasila, semuanya itu untuk menjadikan Pancasila sebagai “Justification“.

Download Full-text

13. The right to life

International Human Rights Law ◽

10.1093/he/9780198805212.003.0013 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Rhona K. M. Smith

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

National Security ◽

Death Penalty ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Right To Life ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Security Forces ◽

International Human ◽

The Right

This chapter examines African, American, European, and international jurisprudence on the right to life. It discusses the positive obligation incumbent on States to protect life; the permissible deprivation of life (the death penalty, death caused by national security forces, and death during armed conflict); and the issue of genocide. The chapter concludes that the right to life is of paramount importance in international human rights law. International law covers not only the straightforward human rights aspects, but also extends to the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide.

Download Full-text

Non-universal Human Rights? How Article 6 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Undermines Human Rights

International Human Rights Law Review ◽

10.1163/22131035-00901004 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 99-117

Author(s):

Billy Holmes

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Death Penalty ◽

Human Dignity ◽

Final Section ◽

Political Rights ◽

Right To Life ◽

Universal Human Rights ◽

Civil And Political Rights ◽

The Right

Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights facilitates inequality regarding the imposition of the death penalty and thus, it cannot ensure universality for the protection of the right to life. Paragraph two of this article states: ‘sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes.’ This article argues that the vagueness of the phrase ‘the most serious crimes’ allows states to undermine human rights principles and human dignity by affording states significant discretion regarding the human rights principles of equality and anti-discrimination. The article posits that this discretion allows states to undermine human dignity and the concept of universal human rights by challenging their universality; by facilitating legal inequality between men and women. Accordingly, it asserts that the implications of not expounding this vague phrase may be far-reaching, particularly in the long-term. The final section of this article offers a potential solution to this problem.

Download Full-text