<![CDATA[The handling of narcotics offenses in Indonesia faces a severe crisis due to the dominance of retributive reasoning, particularly in the Surakarta District Court. This doctrinal legal research aims to dissect the anomaly of subjective judicial considerations that disregard rehabilitation mandates for persons with pure drug dependency, while simultaneously formulating prescriptive legal parameters to limit such discretion. Utilizing statutory and case approaches, the analysis reveals that judges commit teleological judicial overreach. The medical authority of assessment institutions is marginalized by judicial ego and penal populism, which manipulate pretexts of public disturbance to imprison vulnerable end users. This malpractice dismantles restorative justice and exacerbates prison overcrowding. The study concludes that transforming into a humanistic judiciary necessitates three absolute restrictions: the obligation to hear independent medical opinions, establishing evidence thresholds as absolute presumptions for rehabilitation, and a total ban on subjective clauses to aggravate criminal sentences. These legal policies are crucial to restore human rights.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
