<![CDATA[The principle of proportionality the idea that the severity of a criminal sanction should correspond to the gravity of the offence and the culpability of the offender occupies an ambivalent position within Indonesian criminal law. Although proportionality is invoked routinely in judicial reasoning, academic commentary, and legislative drafting, its operational meaning remains contested, and its practical influence on sentencing outcomes is frequently undermined by wide statutory ranges, unstructured judicial discretion, and the absence of binding sentencing guidelines. This article examines how proportionality is conceptualised and applied in Indonesian criminal sentencing, situating the discussion within the broader transition from the colonial-era Wetboek van Strafrecht to the national Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, or KUHP Nasional) enacted through Law Number 1 of 2023 and effective since 2 January 2026. Using a normative-juridical method combined with a qualitative analysis of statutory provisions, judicial decisions, and recent scholarship, the article finds that proportionality in Indonesia functions less as a determinate rule than as an interpretive value that judges invoke selectively, producing persistent sentencing disparity across similar cases. It further argues that the new Criminal Code’s shift toward a restorative and rehabilitative penal philosophy, together with instruments such as judicial pardon and structured sentencing considerations, offers a meaningful but still incomplete foundation for a more coherent proportionality doctrine. The article concludes that Indonesia requires binding sentencing guidelines, a codified proportionality test, and sustained judicial training to translate the constitutional and philosophical commitment to proportionate punishment into consistent practice. ]]>
Copyrights © 2026
