Vol. 5 No. 6 (2025): November
Open Access
Peer Reviewed

LEGISLATION AND IMPLICATIONS OF ARTICLE 54 PARAGRAPH (2) OF THE KUHP CONCERNING THE LAW OF PARDON IN CRIMINAL PROVISION IN INDONESIA

Authors

Debora Oktarina Sihombing , Yuliati , Bambang Sugiri

DOI:

10.54443/ijerlas.v5i6.4798

Published:

2025-12-24

Downloads

Abstract

Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code (KUHP) introduces the concept of rechterlijk pardon or judicial forgiveness in Article 54 paragraph (2). This provision grants judges discretionary authority to release perpetrators from criminal penalties by considering the severity of the act, the perpetrator's personal circumstances, or the circumstances after the crime, as long as they take into account a sense of justice and humanity. This article aims to analyze the legal ratio and practical implications of Article 54 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code by reviewing the philosophical, sociological, and legal foundations of the birth of this norm. The research method used is normative juridical with a statutory, case, and comparative approach. The results of the study indicate that this provision is a correction to the overly rigid principle of legality while also opening up space for judges to balance legal certainty, justice, and expediency. The implication is that judges have broader discretion to uphold substantive justice, including integration with the values ​​of restorative justice. However, without clear technical guidelines, this provision has the potential to give rise to subjectivity and disparity in decisions. Therefore, the effectiveness of the application of Article 54 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code is very dependent on the consistency of the judge's interpretation, the existence of implementing regulations, and adequate supervision.

Keywords:

Criminal Code Rechterlijk Pardon Legislative Ratio Judicial Discretion Criminal Reform

References

Sudikno Mertokusumo, (2010). Understanding the Law. Yogyakarta: Liberty.

Kompas.com. (2009). “Grandma Minah Sentenced for Stealing Cocoa.” Retrieved fromhttps://www.kompas.com

Directorate General of Corrections. (2022). Correctional Statistics 2022. Jakarta: Ministry of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia

Radbruch, G. (2006). Legal Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice (Revised Edition). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bentham, J. (2009). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. New York: Dover Publications. (Karya asli diterbitkan 1789).

Arief, B. N. (2012). Anthology of Criminal Law Policy. Jakarta: Kencana. Muladi. (1995). Selected Chapters on the Criminal Justice System. Semarang: UNDIP Publishing Agency. Heriyadi, Listiana, E., & Lay, Y. N. (2018). An Analysis of the Influence of Service Quality, Personal

Selling and Complaint Handling and Trust on Customer Retention. Jurnal Ekonomi, 7(2), 100–115. Ashworth, A. (2010). Sentencing and Criminal Justice (5th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Friedman, L. M. (2002). Law in America: A Short History. New York: Modern Library.

Author Biographies

Debora Oktarina Sihombing, Universitas Brawijaya

Author Origin : Indonesia

Yuliati, Universitas Brawijaya

Author Origin : Indonesia

Bambang Sugiri, Universitas Brawijaya

Author Origin : Indonesia

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

How to Cite

Debora Oktarina Sihombing, Yuliati, & Bambang Sugiri. (2025). LEGISLATION AND IMPLICATIONS OF ARTICLE 54 PARAGRAPH (2) OF THE KUHP CONCERNING THE LAW OF PARDON IN CRIMINAL PROVISION IN INDONESIA. International Journal of Educational Review, Law And Social Sciences (IJERLAS), 5(6), 246–250. https://doi.org/10.54443/ijerlas.v5i6.4798

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>