<![CDATA[Restorative justice provides an alternative mechanism for resolving criminal cases by emphasizing recovery of the victim’s losses, accountability of the offender, and restoration of social relations. In the theft of furniture-making tools in Baros District, the resolution process involved the victim, two perpetrators, their families, community representatives, and the police, resulting in a peace agreement and compensation of IDR 8,000,000. A juridical-empirical approach with a sociological perspective was employed through literature review and field research, with primary data obtained from interviews, observation, and documentation and secondary data derived from legislation, books, journals, and previous research. The findings demonstrate that the Baros Sector Police exercised discretion in resolving the case through restorative justice despite the offense being charged under Article 363 of the former Criminal Code and involving circumstances that raised questions concerning the formal and material requirements for restorative settlement. The decision was influenced by several considerations, including the victim’s willingness to forgive, the neighborhood relationship between the parties, the educational future of one perpetrator, the perpetrators’ willingness to accept responsibility, compensation for the victim’s losses, and the preservation of social harmony. The case consequently demonstrates a gap between the normative requirements of restorative justice and its practical application, while also illustrating the role of juridical, sociological, and philosophical considerations in police discretion. Clearer implementation guidelines are required to ensure consistency and legal certainty in restorative justice practices.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
