JAKARTA, Yuris Muda Indonesia – The Supreme Court (MA) has granted a judicial review of a number of articles that regulate remission and parole for convicts of extraordinary crimes, including corruption in Government Regulation (PP) No. 99 of 2012.
The decision was taken by three Supreme Court judges, namely Supandi, Yodi Martono, and Is Sudaryono. The applicants submitted a judicial review of four articles, namely Article 34 A paragraph (1) letters a and b, Article 34 A paragraph (3), Article 43 A paragraph (1), and Article 43 A paragraph (3) PP Number 99 of 2012 .
“Decision: Kabul HUM (Right for Material Testing),” reads the verdict that has been confirmed by the spokesman for the Supreme Court, Andi Samsan Nganro.
In the petition for judicial review, the applicant is of the opinion that the four articles are contrary to Law Number 12 of 1995. Based on the decision, the panel of judges had several reasons to revoke the PP.
First, punishment is not only carried out by imprisoning the perpetrator in order to provide a deterrent effect, but must also be in line with the principles of restorative justice.
Second, prisoners are the same subjects as other humans. “Those who at any time can make mistakes that can be subject to criminal sanctions,” quoted from the Supreme Court’s decision.
Thus, the Supreme Court is of the opinion that it is not the prisoners who must be eradicated, but the factors that cause the crime to occur.
The third reason is that the requirements for obtaining remission should not be differentiated. “It can shift the concepts of rehabilitation and social reintegration that have been established and must consider being overcrowded in prisons,” said Hakim in his consideration. The Supreme Court also requested that the conditions for granting remissions outside the basic requirements should become remission rights outside of the legal rights that have been granted. “Because all the legal facts that occurred at the trial, including the defendant who did not want to honestly admit his actions and the involvement of other parties were taken into consideration by the judge in passing a verdict that weighed on the criminal sentence,” said the judge in consideration.
Then, granting remission is the authority of the correctional institution (prison). “Becoming the full authority of a correctional institution which in its task of fostering its inmates cannot be intervened by other institutions,” said the judge in his consideration.
That way, convicts of extraordinary crimes, including corruption, do not need to be justice collaborators or witnesses to perpetrators who work together to obtain remissions.
Remission is a reduction in the criminal period given to convicts and criminal children who meet the requirements specified in the Legislation.
The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has spoken about the revocation and cancellation of Government Regulation (PP) Number 99 of 2012 which is known as the PP on Tightening Corrupt Remissions by the Supreme Court (MA). The KPK hopes that grants, especially remissions to corruptors, must still be considered with a sense of justice.
“Therefore, we hope that the granting of remissions for the perpetrators of extraordinary crimes still takes into account the community’s sense of justice and input from law enforcement officers,” said Ali Fikri, Acting KPK Spokesperson, Friday (29/10/2021).
This is because, said Ali, capturing the corrupt is an effort by all elements. However, the KPK still respects the decision.
“Because the success of eradicating corruption requires our joint commitment and efforts, all stakeholders. Both the government, policy makers, judicial institutions, law enforcement officers, and all elements of society,” said Ali.
“KPK respects the judicial review decision of the Supreme Court panel of judges which revokes and cancels the PP on restricting remissions for prisoners for extraordinary crimes, one of which is corruption,” he added.
Furthermore, the KPK, said Ali, is aware that fostering corruption convicts is the authority of the Directorate General of Corrections. However, he stressed that corruption is an extraordinary crime and has a wide negative impact. Therefore, corruptors must be given a deterrent effect.
“We also understand that the development of corruption convicts is fully the responsibility and authority of the Directorate General of Corrections,” he said.
“Nevertheless, corruption as a crime that has widespread adverse effects, law enforcement should not only provide a sense of justice for the perpetrators and the community, but it is also important to consider the deterrent effect of the punishment. The goal is to prevent this act from happening again,” he added.
Previously, through Government Regulation no. 99 of 2012 concerning the second amendment to Government Regulation no. 32 of 1999 concerning Conditions and Procedures for the Implementation of the Rights of Community Assisted Citizens, granting remissions to prisoners, especially corruption convicts, tightened the requirements and procedures to fulfill the community’s sense of justice even though it remains the right of prisoners, where the said remission is given by the Minister after receiving written consideration from the minister. and/or the head of the relevant institution.
The written considerations as intended are submitted by the Minister and/or the head of the institution
relevant training within a maximum period of 12 (twelve) working days from the receipt of the request for consideration from the Minister.
The granting of remission is determined by a Ministerial decree, no longer through the consideration of the Director General of Corrections, which has been suspected to have been commercialized.
Granting remissions is part of a criminal issue which is a very sensitive issue, considering that this issue is closely related to human dignity. This is even more so at this time where the demand for recognition and respect for human rights is very prominent as a result of the emergence of democratization and globalization. Criminal issues are becoming increasingly urgent to talk about and people are starting to see criminals as the prima donna in conversation.
(AI)
Reference: