RETHINKING RESTORATIVE JUSTICE FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN INDONESIA: TOWARD A BEST-INTEREST-OF-THE-CHILD FRAMEWORK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.n4.3684Keywords:
Restorative Justice, Children in Conflict with the Law, Diversion, Best Interests of the ChildAbstract
A child's growth period requires consistent supervision and guidance from their surroundings, especially their parents. However, in the practice of law enforcement in Indonesia, children in conflict with the law are often treated like miniature adults. Legal proceedings against children, especially those who have committed crimes punishable by seven years or more of imprisonment, often ignore the principle of the best interests of the child as mandated in the juvenile justice system. This situation raises legal issues related to the retributive rather than restorative nature of law enforcement. This study aims to analyze whether the concept of Restorative Justice can be applied in the settlement of cases involving children facing criminal penalties of seven years or more, as well as how the mechanism for its application works within the juvenile criminal justice system in Indonesia. The research method used was the normative juridical method, with a statutory, conceptual, and case approach. Data was obtained through a literature study of relevant legislation, legal literature, and court decisions. The results of the study show that the application of Restorative Justice can be an alternative solution that complements the juvenile criminal justice system in Indonesia, including for juvenile offenders who face seven years or more of imprisonment. Through a diversion mechanism based on the principles of Restorative Justice, the process of resolving juvenile cases can be transferred from the criminal to the non-criminal track through mediation and negotiation involving the perpetrator, victim, family, community, and law enforcement officials. This approach has proven to better guarantee the protection of children's rights, restore social relationships, and prioritize the best interests of the child compared to the conventional approach of punishment.
References
Adnyana, W. A. S., Astariyani, N. L. G., & Bagiastra, I. N. (2024). ANALISIS YURIDIS PENGATURAN SYARAT PELAKSANAAN DIVERSI PADA TINGKAT PEMERIKSAAN DI PENGADILAN DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA INDONESIA. Jurnal Komunikasi Hukum (JKH), 10(1), 25–36.
Ambarwati, M. D. (2024). Implementasi UU SPPA Dalam Menangani Anak Yang Sedang Berhadapan Dengan Hukum. Jurnal Ilmiah Penelitian Mahasiswa, 2(6), 416–424.
Bazemore, G., & Boba, R. (2007). “Doing good” to “make good”: Community theory for practice in a restorative justice civic engagement reentry model. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 46(1–2), 25–56.
Bazemore, S. G. (2001). A comparison of four restorative conferencing models. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile ….
Bradshaw, W., Roseborough, D., & Umbreit, M. S. (2006). The effect of victim offender mediation on juvenile offender recidivism: A meta‐analysis. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 24(1), 87–98.
Daly, K. (2003). Restorative justice: The real story. Restorative Justice: Critical Issues, 3(1), 195.
Efendi, J. (2022). Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris Edisi Kedua. Prenada Media.
Fulham, L. (2018). The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Programs: A Meta-Analysis of Recidivism and Other Outcomes. Carleton University.
Fulham, L., Blais, J., Rugge, T., & Schultheis, E. A. (2025). The effectiveness of restorative justice programs: A meta-analysis of recidivism and other relevant outcomes. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 25(5), 1486–1512.
González, T., & Buth, A. J. (2019). Restorative justice at the crossroads: Politics, power, and language. Contemporary Justice Review, 22(3), 242–256.
Javed, A. A. (2013). A model of output specifications for public-private partnership projects.
Kim, H. J., & Gerber, J. (2012). The effectiveness of reintegrative shaming and restorative justice conferences: Focusing on juvenile offenders’ perceptions in Australian reintegrative shaming experiments. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56(7), 1063–1079.
Marzuki, P. M. (2019). Penelitian Hukum (Cetakan Ke). Kencana.
McCold, P. (2012). A survey of assessment research on mediation and conferencing. In Repositioning restorative justice (pp. 67–118). Willan.
Murphy, K., & Harris, N. (2007). Shaming, shame and recidivism: A test of reintegrative shaming theory in the white-collar crime context. The British Journal of Criminology, 47(6), 900–917.
Nascimento, A. M., Andrade, J., & de Castro Rodrigues, A. (2022). The Psychological Impact of Restorative Justice Practices on Victims of Crimes—a Systematic.
Pakpahan, D. F. (2023). Penerapan Restorative Justice Oleh Penyidik Polri Dalam Kasus Penyalahgunaan Narkotika Oleh Anak Di Wilayah Hukum Polda Metro Jaya. Universitas Kristen Indonesia.
Posumah, D. A. (2023). Prosedur pelaksanaan diversi dalam sistem peradilan pidana anak. Lex Privatum, 11(3).
Retnaningsih, S., Nasution, D. L. S., Velentina, R. A., & Manthovani, K. (2020). Pelaksanaan E-Court Menurut Perma Nomor 3 Tahun 2018 Tentang Administrasi Perkara Di Pengadilan Secara Elektronik Dan E-Litigation Menurut Perma Nomor 1 Tahun 2019 Tentang Administrasi Perkara Dan Persidangan Di Pengadilan Secara Elektronik (Studi Di Pengadilan Negeri Di Indonesia). Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, 50(1), 124–144.
Rossner, M. (2017). Restorative justice in the 21st century: making emotions mainstream.
Sherman, L. W. L., Strang, H. H., Barnes, G. G., Bennett, S. S., Angel, C. M. C., Newbury-Birch, D. D., Woods, D. J. D., & Gill, C. E. C. (2007). Restorative justice: The evidence.
Strang, H., Sherman, L. W., Mayo‐Wilson, E., Woods, D., & Ariel, B. (2013). Restorative justice conferencing (RJC) using face‐to‐face meetings of offenders and victims: Effects on offender recidivism and victim satisfaction. A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 9(1), 1–59.
Surbakti, N. (2015). Peradilan restoratif dalam bingkai empiri: teori dan kebijakan. Genta Publishing.
Umbreit, M. S., Coates, R. B., & Vos, B. (2004). Victim-offender mediation: Three decades of practice and research. Conflict Resol. Q., 22, 279.
van Delft, B. J., Zeijlmans, K., Asscher, J. J., Liefaard, T., & van der Laan, A. M. (2025). The effectiveness of the Dutch juvenile diversion program Halt: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychology, 13(1), 1–13.
Wicaksono, A. H., & Pujiyono, P. (2015). Kebijakan Pelaksanaan Diversi Sebagai Perlindungan Bagi Anak Yang Berkonflik dengan Hukum Pada Tingkat Penuntutan Di Kejaksaan Negeri Kudus. Law Reform, 11(1), 12–42.
Wikan Sinatrio Aji. (2025a). wawancara dengan Novita Sari, konselor anak dan pendamping bagi pelaku dan korban di Pusat Krisis Perempuan di Jombang.
Wikan Sinatrio Aji. (2025b). wawancara dengan Saptono, S.H., M.H., Hakim di Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat.
Wilson, D. B., Olaghere, A., & Kimbrell, C. S. (2017). Effectiveness of restorative justice principles in juvenile justice. US DOJ OJP.
Zehr, H. (1990). Changing lenses: A new focus for crime and justice. Herald Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
I (we) submit this article which is original and unpublished, of my (our) own authorship, to the evaluation of the Veredas do Direito Journal, and agree that the related copyrights will become exclusive property of the Journal, being prohibited any partial or total copy in any other part or other printed or online communication vehicle dissociated from the Veredas do Direito Journal, without the necessary and prior authorization that should be requested in writing to Editor in Chief. I (we) also declare that there is no conflict of interest between the articles theme, the author (s) and enterprises, institutions or individuals.
I (we) recognize that the Veredas do Direito Journal is licensed under a CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE.
Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
