<![CDATA[Cultural heritage is rich in historical, cultural, scientific and intergenerational values that need to be effectively legally protected. Indonesian Law No. 11 of 2010 on Cultural Heritage, Article 66(1) prohibits destruction and Article 105 provides for criminal liability. The relationship between criminal enforcement, administrative measures and the principle of ultimum remedium still remains to be studied. The article considers the issues of formation of criminal liability for destruction of cultural heritage. The article defines the conditions of criminal enforcement as a last resort. The method used is normative legal research, with statutory, conceptual and case approaches, including the Cirebon railroad bridge case. The results indicate that public and intergenerational interests in cultural heritage should be criminalized, but that criminal sanctions should not automatically follow from every regulatory breach. Enforcement should take into account statutory elements, intent, degree of damage, irreversibility, culpability and effectiveness of noncriminal measures. This paper therefore proposes a tiered enforcement model that combines prevention, administrative control, restoration and criminal intervention when non-criminal means are insufficient to prevent serious or continuing damage.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
