scholarly journals PENERAPAN SANKSI TINDAKAN PADA ANAK YANG MELAKUKAN BULLYING SEHINGGA MENYEBABKAN TRAUMA PADA KORBAN DITINJAU DARI UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 11 TAHUN 2012 TENTANG SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA ANAK

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Evita Monica Chrysan ◽  
Yiska Marva Rohi ◽  
Dini Saputri Fredyandani Apituley
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Formal Education ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Government

AbstractBullying or so-called harassment is an act where one or more people try to hurt or control another person by means of physical violence, such as hitting, pushing, and so on as well as verbal bullying such as insulting, shouting, using harsh words, post things that can intimidate someone on social media or anywhere. Acts of bullying generally occur in school children who are underage. Bullying is a matter that must be considered and needs to be treated seriously, considering that the action can endanger the mental and life of a person if done in an excessive manner as well as each person has a limit on themselves regarding the level of bully that exceeds that limit. The regulation of legislation governing criminal sanctions for children is Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Justice System. Therefore the bullying action that has a negative impact is a criminal offense and it is necessary to apply sanctions on the bullying child in a strict manner which not only causes a deterrent effect but the sanction is sought in order to improve behavior considering that a child is the nation's next generation as well as the application of action sanctions for children regulated in Article 82 paragraph (1) letter e of Law Number 11 Year 2012 concerning the Criminal Justice System for Children, namely the obliga-tion to attend formal education and/or training provided by the government or private bodies.Keywords: application of sanction actions on children; bullying; criminal justice system for childrenAbstrakBullying atau disebut perundungan adalah tindakan dimana satu orang atau lebih mencoba untuk menyakiti atau mengontrol orang lain dengan cara kekerasan baik menyakiti dalam bentuk fisik, seperti memukul, mendorong, dan sebagainya serta bullying dalam bentuk verbal seperti menghina, membentak, menggunakan kata-kata kasar, memposting hal yang dapat mengintimidasi seseorang di sosial media atau di tempat manapun. Tindakan bullying pada umumnya terjadi pada anak sekolah yang masih di bawah umur. Tindakan bullying menjadi hal yang harus diperhatikan serta perlu mendapat penanganan serius mengingat tindakan tersebut dapat membahayakan mental serta nyawa seseorang apabila dilakukan dengan cara berlebihan sebagaimana pula tiap-tiap orang memiliki batasan pada diri masing-masing mengenai tingkatan bully yang melampaui batas tersebut. Regulasi dari peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur sanksi pidana bagi anak adalah Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak. Maka dari itu tindakan bullying yang menimbulkan dampak negatif tersebut merupakan suatu tindak pidana dan diperlukan penerapan sanksi pada anak pelaku bullying secara tegas yang bukan saja menimbulkan efek jera namun sanksi tersebut diupayakan agar dapat memperbaiki perilaku mengingat seorang anak adalah generasi penerus bangsa seperti halnya penerapan sanksi tindakan pada anak yang diatur dalam Pasal 82 ayat (1) huruf e Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak yaitu kewajiban mengikuti pendidikan formal dan/atau pelatihan yang diadakan oleh pemerintah atau badan swasta.Kata kunci: bullying; penerapan sanksi tindakan pada anak; sistem peradilan pidana anak

scholarly journals DIVERSI TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA ANAK

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
I Made Wiharsa
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Research Type

Diversion of narcotic crime in the criminal justice system for the children. Children in conflict with the law, especially in narcotic cases not specifically regulated in Law Number 35 of 2009 on the Narcotics. During this time the children in conflict with the law that is drafted in the Law Number 11 of 2012 on the Criminal Justice System for The Children. Criminal punishment against with a certain person started because that person has committed a crime. Children in the case of a criminal act of narcotics criminal sanctions will have a negative impact on a child's future. Referring to the criminal justice system for the children are known to attempt a diversion to divert the child's completion of the criminal case of the trial into a non-judicial process. This research with the normative methods research type, which aims to determine the impact of the imposition of criminal sanctions and diversion efforts for children in narcotic crime. Diversi tindak pidana narkotika dalam sistem peradilan pidana anak. Anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum khususnya dalam tindak pidana narkotika belum diatur secara khusus dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika. Selama ini terhadap anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum mengacu pada Undang-Undang Nomor. 11 Tahun 2012 Tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak.  Penjatuhan pidana terhadap seseorang bermula karena seseorang tersebut telah melakukan suatu tindak pidana. Anak dalam hal melakukan tindak pidana narkotika yang dijatuhi sanksi pidana akan berdampak buruk pada masa depan anak. Mengacu pada sistem peradilan pidana anak yang dikenal upaya diversi untuk mengalihkan penyelesaian perkara tindak pidana anak dari proses peradilan ke proses non peradilan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metoda penelitian hukum normatif, yang bertujuan untuk dapat mengetahui dampak penjatuhan sanksi pidana dan upaya diversi bagi anak dalam tindak pidana narkotika.

scholarly journals RECONSTRUCTION OF CHILD CRIMINAL SANCTIONS IN PERSPECTIVE OF LAW NUMBER 11 THE YEAR 2012 CONCERNING JUSTICE CHILD CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM BASED ON JUSTICE VALUES

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (18) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Akhmad Munawar ◽  
Gunarto Gunarto ◽  
Anis Mashdurohatun ◽  
Sri Endah Wahyuningsih
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
Prison Sentence ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law

Children who are in conflict with the law are seen to need to be given physical and spiritual protection. Bearing in mind, the Court's decision is more likely to impose imprisonment sanctions. The United Nations in several Congresses has criticized imprisonment sanctions, besides having the potential to cause stigmatization in children, it is also ineffective and does not create a deterrent effect. This study aims to examine and to analyze the implementation of Child Criminal sanctions in the perspective of Law Number 11-year 2012 concerning the Child Criminal Justice System, to analyze the factors that influence child criminal sanctions that are not yet fair. The research question is how the reconstruction of child-based criminal sanctions based on justice is. This research is included in non-doctrinal research (empirical). It used three theories, namely the theory of criminal purpose to analyze the first problem, the dignified justice theory to analyze the second problem and progressive legal theory to analyze the third problem. The results found that the implementation of sanctions Crime against a child in conflict with a law imposed by a prison sentence, the Judge in his consideration emphasizes juridical considerations so that the criminal sanctions imposed on the child are not in accordance with teleological theory as the purpose of punishment. Criminal sanctions against children have not brought justice, among others, because several articles in Law Number 11-year 2012 concerning the Child Criminal Justice System still have weaknesses. Reconstruction of Articles that hinder the realization of fair criminal sanctions, namely Article 7 paragraph (2) Article 32 paragraph (2), Article 71 paragraph (1) letter e, Article 79 paragraph (1) and Article 81 paragraph (1) of the Law Number 11 the year 2012 concerning the Child Criminal Justice System.

scholarly journals THE REGULATION URGENCY OF CHILDREN UNDER 12 (TWELVE) YEARS OLD IN THE ACT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 233-241
Author(s):  
Eko Iswahyudi ◽  
◽  
I. Nyoman Nurjaya ◽  
Nurini Aprilianda ◽  
Bambang Sugiri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
Age Limit

In the Act No. 11 of 2012 about the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, it explains the age limit for juvenile criminal responsibility for those who commit criminal acts, as regulated in Article 1 point 3. The children between 12 (twelve) years old and 18 (eighteen) years old are suspected of committing a crime.. The purpose of this study was to determine and analyze the urgency of regulating teenager under the age of 12 in the constitution of Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2021 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System as well as children in conflict with the law.This type of normative legal research uses a statute approach and a case approach through a literature study. The results of the research on the urgency of regulating children under the age of 12 in Act Number 11 of 2021 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System as well as children in conflict with the law. Many cases of crime that occur under the age of 12 years. So that special attention is needed regarding the minimum age limit for children who can be given criminal sanctions related to Article 1 letter 3 and Article 21 paragraph 1 of Act Number 11 of 2021 about the Juvenile Criminal Justice System without ignoring the psychological aspects of the child, whether acting as perpetrators, witnesses or victims. The purpose of punishing children is relatively not just to retaliate against people who commit criminal acts but has a useful purpose.

THE POSITION OF QANUN 6 OF 2014 ON JINAYAT LAW TOWARD ACT 11 OF 2012 ON JUVENILE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM RELATED TO CHILD CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Rifqi Qowiyul Iman
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Justice System ◽  
National Level ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Track System ◽  
Double Track ◽  
Rule Out

This paper aims to describe the differences and the position of the legal rules for juvenile crimes between Qanun 6 of 2014 and Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System.  This research is descriptive qualitative research. The results show that Qanun Number 6 of 2014 also regulates criminal sanctions for children, which are normatively regulated in Law Number 11 of 2012. In addition, Qanun, as Aceh Islamic criminal law legalizes canning punishment for children, as well as the double-track system adopted by The Law of Juvenile Criminal Justice System is not explicitly accommodated in Qanun. Qanun at the level of a Regional Regulation is part of the hierarchy of laws and regulations that should be in line with what generally applies at the national level. Law Number 11 of 2006 is being the basis of the authority to make Qanun, as long as there is no court decision invalidates it, Qanun Number 6 of 2014, which is a derivative of Law Number 11 of 2006, can be declared as "lex specialis" of The Juvenile Criminal Justice System law which regulates child crime. However, it does not rule out the possibility that in the future, the judicial review of the article can be conducted.

Cultural competence in criminal justice

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 39-42
Author(s):  
Angela Herbert MBE
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Cultural Competence ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Voluntary Organizations ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Government ◽  
Minority Ethnic

Purpose – Considers the role of cultural competence in the criminal-justice system and the crucial role that can be played by the right kind of training. Design/methodology/approach – Argues that there are no quick solutions to disproportionality of black and minority ethnic people in the criminal-justice system but advances the view that while individuals are incarcerated, it is important for the organization and its staff to make provisions that will make a difference. Findings – Suggests that any training provision should be made subject to those industries that are likely to employ black minority ethnic (BME) people, and that offering skills in prison that do not reflect cultural attainment in industry would be setting individuals up to fail. Practical implications – Urges that awareness and training should be embraced throughout all organizations from government policymakers, chief executive officers, management board, operational staff and partners, voluntary organizations and the client or user. Social implications – Argues that commitment from the government and the prison service can result in the provision of the kinds of cultural-competence learning and skills training that can more appropriately meet the needs of, in particular, BME individuals who are frequently ill-equipped when they leave the judiciary system. Originality/value – Concludes that this support would also help to communicate and promote awareness of other people’s cultures, provide insight into their understanding of the organization’s culture while also enabling the public to understand the importance of implementing positive change.

scholarly journals Penegakan Hukum Pidana Terhadap Anak Yang Terjerat Perkara Pidana Melalui Diversi (Studi Di Polrestabes Medan)

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84
Author(s):  
Akalafikta Jaya ◽  
Triono Eddy ◽  
Alpi Sahari
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Convictions ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Law

In the past, the punishment of children was the same as the punishment of adults. This causes the psychological condition of children ranging from investigation, investigation and trial to be disturbed because it is often intimidated by law enforcement agencies. Under these conditions, Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Justice System was born. One of the reforms in the Child Criminal Justice System Law requires the settlement of a child criminal case by diversion. Based on the results of research that the conception of criminal offenses against children in conflict with the law in Indonesia is different from criminal convictions to adults. Children are given the lightest possible punishment and half of the criminal convictions of adult criminal offenses. That criminal liability for children who are ensnared in a criminal case according to the Law on the Criminal Justice System for Children is still carried out but with different legal sanctions from adults. Criminal imprisonment against children is an ultimumremedium effort, meaning that criminal imprisonment against children is the last legal remedy after there are no other legal remedies that benefit the child. That the concept of enforcement of criminal law against children caught in criminal cases through diversion is in fact not all have applied it. Some criminal cases involving children as the culprit, in court proceedings there are still judges who impose prison sentences on children who are dealing with the law.

scholarly journals Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Anak Sebagai Perantara Narkotika (Study Putusan No.14/Pid.Sus Anak.2015/PN.Dps)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-199
Author(s):  
Rezky Ayu Saraswati ◽  
I Nyoman Sujana ◽  
Diah Gayatri Sudibya
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Child Protection ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
District Court ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Moment

The rise of drug trafficking involving children as narcotics couriers is a problem that needs serious attention from both the government, law enforcement and the community. Children who commit crimes must continue to obtain legal protection in the best interests of the child. Child protection is contained in Law number 11 of 2012 concerning the juvenile justice system, where at the moment children can become narcotics abuse even as narcotics brokers with the rampant abuse of narcotics for all circles both in Indonesia and in the international world. The formulation of the problem raised is how is the basis for judges' consideration in imposing criminal sanctions on children as intermediaries for narcotics? And what is the legal protection of children as an intermediary for narcotics? The problems to be discussed will be examined based on normative perspectives and the legislative approach to the decisions of the Denpasar District Court No. 14 / Pid.Sus Anak / 2015 / PN. Dps, that the judge considers that the accused child has committed narcotics crimes by being charged Law number 35 of 2009 concerning narcotics, which can be sentenced to a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 20 years and can be subject to fines. Legal protection for children is carried out by judges by imposing criminal training on employment in a generation of Indonesian foundations, solely so that children can carry out their activities as usual when they return to the community and do not disturb their psychic rights and can increase their skills in children. The child does not return to committing a crime.

24. Criminal justice institutions

2021 ◽  
pp. 719-741
Author(s):  
Steve Case ◽  
Phil Johnson ◽  
David Manlow ◽  
Roger Smith ◽  
Kate Williams
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Considerable Influence ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Governmental Agency ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
The Government

This chapter explores the criminal justice institutions. In practice, the criminal justice system contains five distinct institutions that are responsible for delivering justice: the police, the Crown Prosecution Service (known as the CPS), the courts, probation providers, and prisons. Although they are all part of one overall system, each has different aims, roles, and challenges. Theoretically, the fact that these bodies are all accountable to the separation of powers concept should bring some unity in that it gives Parliament, the independent judiciary, and central government opportunities to shape the system to align with their version of justice. The government can exert considerable influence through the work of the Ministry of Justice or MoJ. The MoJ is currently the most important governmental agency in the criminal justice system, but the larger and more powerful Home Office is also involved to an extent, mainly with the police.

Digital Degradation

2020 ◽  
pp. 113-136
Author(s):  
Sarah Esther Lageson
Keyword(s):  
Big Data ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Social Inequality ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Technological Systems ◽  
Big Data Technologies ◽  
The Government

Interviews with more than 100 people whose records appear online show how the ability to manage digital punishment is directly tied to a person’s familiarity with technological systems and their faith in bureaucracy. Instead of confronting the government or the criminal justice system, many people engage in digital avoidance, afraid that any attempts will only make the problem worse. This intersection between the criminal justice system and technology reproduces social inequality at the speed of the internet, disproportionately impacting people who have less access to and command over digital technologies. This chapter discusses the qualities of digital punishment, the strategies people who are experiencing digital punishment deploy to deal with their online stigma, and an explanation for why many people choose to engage in digital avoidance rather than try to have their online record removed. Rooted in theories of the digital divide and the disparate impact of big data technologies, the chapter concludes with a discussion of how digital punishment challenges long-held theories of criminal stigma, desistance, and rehabilitation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document