Abdul Madjid
Faculty of Law, Brawijaya University Malang, Indonesia

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Juridical Implication of Restorative Justice On Prosecutorial Authority In Penal Mediation I Gde Putu Prema Dhananjaya; Milda Istiqomah; Abdul Madjid
YURISDIKSI : Jurnal Wacana Hukum dan Sains Vol. 22 No. 2 (2026): September in progress
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Merdeka University Surabaya, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55173/yurisdiksi.v22i2.367

Abstract

The development of criminal law in Indonesia shows a paradigm shift from a retributive approach to a restorative approach that emphasizes the restoration of victims' losses, the responsibility of perpetrators, and the restoration of social relations. This shift is marked by the presence of a Restorative Justice mechanism in the National Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), which can be implemented from the investigation, inquiry, prosecution, to trial. On the other hand, the Prosecutor's Office Law has previously authorized Prosecutors to conduct Penal Mediation as a form of out-of-court criminal case resolution. This condition raises legal issues in the form of potential overlapping authority, dualism in case resolution mechanisms, and unclear relationships between Restorative Justice and Penal Mediation in the national criminal justice system. This research uses a normative legal method with a statutory, conceptual, and systematic approach. Primary legal materials consist of laws and regulations related to the National Criminal Procedure Code, the Prosecutor's Office Law, and other relevant provisions, while secondary legal materials are obtained from literature, journals, and legal doctrine. The research findings indicate that the presence of Restorative Justice mechanisms strengthens the humanist orientation in law enforcement, but simultaneously demands harmonization of norms so that the Prosecutor's authority in Penal Mediation maintains legal certainty. Penal Mediation is essentially a special instrument within the Restorative Justice framework that can be optimized at the prosecution stage. Going forward, regulatory reform is needed that clarifies the limits of authority, implementation procedures, case criteria, and legal consequences of restorative resolution to create an effective, simple, and just criminal justice system.
Formulation of Asset Confiscation Without Criminal Decision (Non-Conviction Based) Based On The Principle of Due Process of Law Michael Yudhistira Lumban Goal; Abdul Madjid
YURISDIKSI : Jurnal Wacana Hukum dan Sains Vol. 22 No. 2 (2026): September in progress
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Merdeka University Surabaya, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55173/yurisdiksi.v22i2.374

Abstract

Asset forfeiture is a strategic legal instrument in the eradication of corruption, particularly for recovering state financial losses. However, asset forfeiture mechanisms that rely on criminal convictions often face various obstacles, such as the complexity of the evidentiary system, the lengthy judicial process, and the perpetrator's ability to conceal or divert assets derived from crime. Therefore, the concept of Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture (NCB) has developed as an alternative legal policy that allows for asset forfeiture without having to wait for a final and binding criminal verdict. This study aims to analyze the NCB concept as a legal policy for asset forfeiture in corruption cases, while also examining the normative weaknesses in the Asset Forfeiture Bill, which currently does not optimally accommodate this principle. The study results indicate that the Asset Forfeiture Bill still has several fundamental weaknesses, including the lack of explicit regulation of the reverse burden of proof mechanism, provisions that open up the opportunity for changes to legal norms through government regulations, and the failure to prioritize asset forfeiture over criminal punishment. These conditions have the potential to reduce the effectiveness of recovering state losses and undermine the primary objective of asset forfeiture. Therefore, a reformulation of asset confiscation legal policy is needed by strengthening the reverse burden of proof, emphasizing compliance with the hierarchy of laws and regulations, and shifting the law enforcement paradigm to prioritize asset recovery. Therefore, the implementation of the NCB concept is expected to be an effective, fair, and progressive legal instrument in supporting the eradication of corruption in Indonesia.