scholarly journals Children's Criminal Responsibilities: Comparative Study in Islamic and Criminal Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-108
Author(s):  
Heni Hendrawati ◽  
Nurwati Nurwati ◽  
Budiharto Budiharto

The study of criminal liability against child offenders based on Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Criminal Justice System of Children and according to Islamic Criminal Law is a very interesting phenomenon to study, especially during this time many phenomena of a minor underage sitting in the accused and detained like a big villain just because of a trivial matter. This study includes the type of research library research, so in this study, researchers conducted data collection through the study and library research on books relating to the problems the authors studied. In analyzing this study, the authors used a comparative method that is comparing child criminal liability in positive criminal law based on Law No. 11 of 2012 concerning the Child Criminal Justice System, with child criminal liability in Islamic criminal law. In Islamic law, a child will not be subject to a punishment for the crime he committed, because there is no legal responsibility for a child of any age until he reaches the age of baliq, qadhi will only have the right to reprimand him or set some restrictions for him to help improve the child in the future. It is expected that this research can contribute to the renewal of national criminal law, especially regarding criminal liability committed by children, taking into account the concepts in Islamic criminal law.

Author(s):  
Bendry Almy

ABSTRAKPrinsip keadilan restoratif dalam peraturan perundang-undangan hukum pidana yang berlaku di Indonesia hanya diatur dalam Undang-Undang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak (SPPA) yang diaplikasikan dalam bentuk diversi, namun diversi tersebut hanya ditujukan bagi pelaku tindak pidana anak bukan untuk pelaku dewasa, peraturan perundang-perundangan pidana Indonesia belum mengatur prinsip keadilan restoratif bagi pelaku dewasa. Dalam praktik penegakan hukum, penerapan prinsip keadilan restoratif bagi pelaku dewasa sebagian telah dilaksanakan melalui diskresi, namun secara teoritis dan pratik pelaksanaan diskresi masih bermasalah karena belum memenuhi tiga nilai dasar hukum yaitu keadilan, kepastian dan kemanfaatan, dan diskresi juga bisa menimbulkan permasalahan ketidakadilan, karena adanya perbedaan perlakuan dalam proses penegakan hukum, sehingga asas “equality before the law” tidak dilaksanakan. Tujuan penelitian adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana pelaksanaan prinsip keadilan restoratif dalam peraturan perundang-undangan pidana yang berlaku di Indonesia dan bagaimana penerapan diversi bagi pelaku dewasa dalam rangka mewujudkan keadilan restoratif. Jenis penelitian yaitu penelitian hukum normatif atau penelitian hukum kepustakaan, untuk mencari dan menemukan data yang dibutuhkan untuk menjawab permasalahan. Hasil penelitian diketahui bahwa peraturan perundang-undangan hukum pidana Indonesia belum mengatur tentang prinsip keadilan restoratif bagi pelaku dewasa, prinsip keadilan restoratif diterapkan baru sebatas untuk pelaku anak yang diaplikasikan dalam bentuk diversi. Secara teoritis, historis, normatif dan praktik prosedural, diversi juga dapat diterapkan untuk menyelesaikan perkara tindak pidana yang dilakukan oleh orang dewasa, namun perlu adanya perubahan dan penyesuaian terutama dalam hal tujuan pelaksanaan, kwalifikasi jenis tindak pidana dan mekanisme atau prosedur pelaksanaannya.Kata kunci: kebijakan hukum pidana; anak; dewasa; diversi; keadilan restoratif.AbstractThe principle of restorative justice in criminal law regulations in force in Indonesia is only regulated in the Law on the Criminal Justice System for Children (SPPA) which is applied in the form of diversion, however the diversion is only intended for child offenders not for adult offenders, Indonesian criminal laws and regulations do not regulate the principle of restorative justice for adult offenders. In law enforcement practices, the application of the principle of restorative justice for adult offenders has been partially implemented through discretion, but theoretically and practically the implementation of discretion is still problematic because it does not meet the three basic legal values, namely justice, certainty and benefit, and discretion can also cause problems of injustice, due to differences in treatment in the law enforcement process, so the principle of "equality before the law" is not implemented. The research goal is to find out how the implementation of the principles of restorative justice in criminal legislation in Indonesia, and how the application of diversion for adult offenders in order to realize restorative justice. This type of research is normative research or library research, to search and find the data needed to answer the problem. The results of the study note that Indonesian criminal law regulations do not regulate the principles of restorative justice for adult offenders, the principle of restorative justice is applied only to the child offenders which is applied in the form of diversion. Theoretically, historically, normatively and procedural practice, diversion can also be applied to resolve cases by adult offenders, but there needs to be changes and adjustments especially in terms of implementation objectives, qualification of the type of crime and the mechanism or procedure for its implementation.Keywords: criminal law policy; children; adults; diversion; restorative justice.


Author(s):  
Kebreab Isaac Weldesellasie

This chapter examines the development of criminal law and substantive, procedural, and relevant institutions on the African continent from antiquity to the present day. It demonstrates the existence of a well-knit and contextual criminal justice system throughout Africa, which was later infused with elements of Islamic law to serve the needs of the newly converted populations. The key characteristic of pre-colonial African criminal law is its customary, unwritten nature, with a focus on serving community rather than individual pursuits. Incarceration and punishment were unknown and instead efforts were made to compensate the victim, whose role was central to the process. This customary law served the continent until the advent of colonialism, whose protagonists enforced their conception of social control by reducing or even eliminating the application and influence of customary norms. As a result, even following decolonization, the new African nations retained colonial criminal legislation.


ĪQĀN ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (01) ◽  
pp. 47-64
Author(s):  
Dr. Naveed Altaf Khan ◽  
Hafiz Muhammad Zaheer

This study contains on a legal maxim; crime neither can be proved nor be punished without verse or legal text (statute), as well as it is a comparative analysis in prospective of Islamic criminal law and Pakistani criminal law. In contemporary world it is a basic principle in the criminal justice system that a person can neither be convicted nor be punished without prescribed law. Islamic law has fixed some punishments strictly like ḥudūd, qiṣāṣ and dīyyāt. while some of the punishments like tazīrāt & siyāsah shar’iah come under the jurisdiction of state according to the circumstances, which can be fixed by practicing parliamentary ijtīhād by if and only if the experts islamic legal system. This study will deal with the literal meaning of the legal maxim, & will be explained with the references of Qur’an & Sunnah and its applications from Islamic law (al-fiqh al-islāmī). To make it more clear & evident this maxim will be compared with the constitution & penal code of Pakistan, focusing on the main differences between the concept of crime in both i.e. Islamic criminal law and the Pakistani law.


Author(s):  
Paul H. Robinson

Crime-control utilitarians and retributivist philosophers have long been at war over the appropriate distributive principle for criminal liability and punishment, with little apparent possibility of reconciliation between the two. In the utilitarians’ view, the imposition of punishment can be justified only by the practical benefit that it provides: avoiding future crime. In the retributivists’ view, doing justice for past wrongs is a value in itself that requires no further justification. The competing approaches simply use different currencies: fighting future crime versus doing justice for past wrongs. It is argued here that the two are in fact reconcilable, in a fashion. We cannot declare a winner in the distributive principle wars but something more like a truce. Specifically, good utilitarians ought to support a distributive principle based upon desert because the empirical evidence suggests that doing justice for past wrongdoing is likely the most effective and efficient means of controlling future crime. A criminal justice system perceived by the community as conflicting with its principles of justice provokes resistance and subversion, whereas a criminal justice system that earns a reputation for reliably doing justice is one whose moral credibility inspires deference, assistance, and acquiescence, and is more likely to have citizens internalize its norms of what is truly condemnable conduct. Retributivists ought to support empirical desert as a distributive principle because, while it is indeed distinct from deontological desert, there exists an enormous overlap between the two, and it seems likely that empirical desert may be the best practical approximation of deontological desert. Indeed, some philosophers would argue that the two are necessarily the same.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-84
Author(s):  
Akalafikta Jaya ◽  
Triono Eddy ◽  
Alpi Sahari

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.


1995 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 908
Author(s):  
Diana Ginn

The author reviews the response of the criminal justice system to the problem of wife assault by focusing on the key players within the system. The way the criminal law applies to wife assault affects battered women's access to that area of law known as family law, with negative repercussions for them and their children. Several myths about the nature of wife assault help ensure an inappropriate response. These include the myths that the woman is to blame, that by just leaving the abusive situation she can resolve it, and that if she does not leave it is because she enjoys the abuse. The author reviews current methods used by police, prosecutors and judges for dealing with wife assault and discusses the inadequacies of those methods. She concludes that despite many recommendations for change, there have been no significant improvements in the way the criminal justice system deals with wife assault. It is incumbent upon the legal profession to demonstrate professional responsibility by ensuring that wife assault is taken more seriously than it is now and than it has been in the past. This is a necessary reform before battered women can rely on the criminal justice system.


FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 128
Author(s):  
Rugun Romaida Hutabarat

In criminal law, a person charged with a criminal offense may be punished if it meets two matters, namely his act is unlawful, and the perpetrator of a crime may be liable for the indicated action (the offender's error) or the act may be dismissed to the perpetrator, and there is no excuse. The reasons may result in the death or the removal of the implied penalty. But it becomes a matter of how if the Letter of Statement Khilaf is the answer to solve the legal problems. The person who refuses or does not do what has been stated in the letters is often called "wanprestasi" because the statement is categorized as an agreement. The statement includes an agreement which is the domain of civil law or criminal law, so its application in the judicial system can be determined. This should be reviewed in the application of the law, are there any rules governing wrong statements in the criminal justice system. By using a declaration of khilaf as a way out of criminal matters, then the statement should be known in juridical rules. This study uses normative juridical methods, by conceptualizing the law as a norm rule which is a benchmark of human behavior, with emphasis on secondary data sources collected from the primary source of the legislation. The result of this research is that the statement of khilaf has legality, it is based on Jurisprudence No. 3901 K / Pdt / 1985 jo Article 189 Paragraph (1) of Indonesian criminal procedure law. However, this oversight letter needs to be verified in front of the court to be valid evidence, but this letter of error is not a deletion of a criminal offense, because the culpability of the defendant has justified the crime he committed. Such recognition, cannot make it free from the crime that has been committed.Keywords: Legality, Letter of Statement, Criminal Justice System


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Sean J. Mallett

<p>One of the fundamental principles of the criminal law is consistency: like offenders must be treated alike. However, research has shown that when it comes to sentencing in New Zealand there is in fact substantial regional disparity in the penalty imposed on similarly situated offenders. The situation is unacceptable, and undermines the integrity of the criminal justice system. This paper will explore three different mechanisms for guiding judicial discretion in the pursuit of sentencing consistency. It will undertake an analysis of mandatory sentences and the ‘instinctive synthesis’ approach, both of which will be shown to be unsatisfactory. Instead, the paper will argue that the establishment of a Sentencing Council with a mandate to draft presumptively binding guidelines is the most appropriate way forward for New Zealand. This option finds the correct equilibrium between giving a judge sufficient discretion to tailor a sentence that is appropriate in the circumstances of the individual case, yet limiting discretion enough to achieve consistency between cases.</p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-112
Author(s):  
Harrison O Mbori

Criminal sentencing is an integral part in any judicial system for the fair administration of justice. The process of sentencing and the standards applied by judicial officers has, however, been a notoriously difficult component in many criminal law systems. In Kenya, sentencing has been blamed as one of the sources of ‘popular dissatisfaction with the administration of justice’ to borrow from Roscoe Pound. This was the impetus for the Kenyan Judiciary to introduce the Sentencing Policy Guidelines, 2016 (SPGs). This paper is a general commentary, critique, and analysis of the SPGs. The author argues that SPGs come at an instructive epoch in Kenya’s economic, socio-political, and cultural development. This contribution is not a polemic on the Kenyan SPGs. The commentary makes sideglances to various jurisdictions that have had a longer experience with sentencing guidelines. The article forecasts that Kenyan SPGs will, despite its few shortcomings, nevertheless, prove to be important for all judicial officers involved in Kenya’s criminal justice system.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-154
Author(s):  
Muchammad Chasani

The regulation of corporate criminal liability in Indonesia's criminal justice system is basically a new and still debatable issue. It is said that because in the Criminal Code is not recognized and regulated explicitly about the corporation as a subject of criminal law. This is a natural thing since the WvS Criminal Code still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere non potest" or "non-potest university delinquere", that is, a legal entity can not commit a crime. Thus, if in a society there is a criminal offense, then the criminal act is deemed to be done by the board of the corporation concerned. Regarding the corporate criminal responsibility system in Indonesia, in the corruption law Article 20 paragraph (1), if the corporation committed a criminal act of corruption, then those responsible for the criminal act shall be the corporation only, the management only, or the corporation and its management. Thus, it can be said that the regulation of corporate criminal liability in the legal system in Indonesia is expressly only regulated in special criminal legislation, because the Criminal Code of WvS still adheres to the principle of "societas delinquere nonpotest" so it is not possible to enforce corporate criminal liability in it.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document