SEMINAR NASIONAL - PARADIGMA SISTEM PEMIDANAAN DALAM KUHP NASIONAL

min khasyatillah

watilkal

amsalu

nadribuhain

La'allahum

yatafakkarun.

Huwallahulladzi

la

ilahaillahu

Alimul

ghaibi

wasyahadati

huwar rahmanurrahim.

Alimul

ghaibi

wasyahadati

huwar

rahmanurrahim

Sadaqallahul

jabbarul

adzim.

Asalamualaikum warahmatullahi

wabarakatuh. May

the peace, mercy, and

blessings of Allah be with you too. May Allah bless you.

Allah is truly righteous in all His words. Ladies and

gentlemen, respected guests. Entering the

next event, let us

sing together the national anthem

Indonesia Raya. Continued with the Hymn of the

Islamic University of Indonesia. Attendees

are requested to stand.

[music]

[music]

[music]

[music]

nation

[music]

[music] long

live my land

[music] my people queen of all

awaken their souls

[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [

music]

[music]

[music]

[music] [music] [music

]

[music]

Islamic University of

Indonesia

To You [music]

we promise

[music] advance

sui activate [music]

heart

for [music] development of

Islamic sharia [music] our practice [music]

remain

in

[music]

heavy

may [music] Allah

marry

[music] amen

[music]

Audience please sit back down.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, our

respected guests. Entering the next event, namely the

welcome. The welcome speech will be delivered by

the Head of the Department of the Faculty of Law,

Islamic University of Indonesia. For this reason, we

respectfully invite Mr.

Dr. Bambang Sutioso, SH., MH is

welcome.

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. Asalamualaikum

warahmatullahi wabarakatuh.

Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah.

Praise be to God. Amma ba'du.

Good morning, greetings of health, greetings of

prosperity to us all.

I'll allow you to start with a rhyme

so that it flows. Take a trip to the city of

Jogja.

Don't forget to stop by and buy bakbiah.

Welcome to the national

criminal seminar. Hopefully the knowledge gained will make your heart

happy.

[applause]

Respected speakers

Professor Dr. Pujiono from the Faculty of Law,

Diponegoro University, Semarang.

Dear Prof. Dr. Harti

Winingsih is from the University of March 11,

Surakarta.

I also respect Mrs. Dr. Aroma

Elmina Marta.

from the Faculty of Law UII and also the

moderator,

Mr. doctoral candidate, Ari Wibowo.

God willing, hopefully I will soon become a

doctor, as well as the lecturers and

all the participants of the national seminar on

the paradigm of the Criminal System in the National Criminal Code

. It is very good that on

this morning we can gather

together to participate in this activity

and of course we will get

a lot of enlightenment from the

speakers who will speak regarding the

problem of criminalization

in the National Criminal Code.

We have long longed to

have new national legal products

. Because so far we have

inherited many legal products from the

Netherlands, including the Criminal Code. And it turns out,

thank God, the

punishment is actually complete.

So, the Criminal Procedure Code (KHP) has been ratified, God willing, it

will come into effect in 2026, and also the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) just

yesterday. So, both the material

and formal laws are complete.

This is different from the civil procedural law

that we are in charge of.

This civil procedural law, both civil law and

civil procedural law, has not yet

been unified. Hopefully this will be

soon. Well, regarding

this seminar, the Dean asked us

to represent him in giving a speech

because he also gave a speech

at another event. Hopefully, I

can

provide some suggestions later

in the context of this seminar.

Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, whom I

respect. Regarding the criminal midwifery system

in the National Criminal Code, of

course, due to changes in

regulations, there are new things that

will be conveyed by the

speakers. At least I see

there are three things that will be discussed and

conveyed.

Firstly, it is related to the renewal of

sanctions in national criminal law,

yes, sanctions, yes, if this criminal law is

usually related to sanctions, yes,

wrong sanctions, yes, if in a

civil case, it doesn't go there,

what is the compensation, yes, if

in a civil case, if this is the

approach, sanctions, so indeed this criminal law is

the harshest law, I think, yes,

because it concerns the spiritual aspect, the aspect of

human rights, which sometimes has to be

limited, yes. The second is related to the

midwifery system in the

corporate context, yes, in the national Criminal Code and

the third is related to the midwifery system

for children, yes, in the national KOP, yes.

So please follow it later. These are three

things that will be updated, of course, they are

very important, yes, and this can be

conveyed to the students immediately because

this is something new and of course this

can be immediately, what is the term, eh, is it still this,

yes, not yet dry, the term is not yet dry. So it is

very important to convey this to

students so that students also

get enlightening things

in the context of the development of our criminal law

.

So, we hope that this activity can

run well and smoothly and can be

fully participated by all participants

. Hopefully the criminal seminar activities

this morning and until the afternoon

can run smoothly. We

get optimal benefits from

this seminar activity. And we

apologize if there are any shortcomings in this introduction

. We also end with the

rhyme, a

piece of diamond for your lover.

Yes, that's enough and thank you.

Peace be upon you. warahmatullahi

wabarakatuh. May

the peace, mercy, and

blessings of Allah be with you too. We would like to thank

Dr. Bambang Sutioso, SH.

MHum for the warm welcome that has been

conveyed.

Okay, ladies and gentlemen, we

respect you. Entering the next event

as a form of appreciation and

memento, the event continued

with the handover of souvenirs. We ask for your

willingness, Dr. Bambang Sutioso,

S.H., M.Hum. To be able to move forward.

And we also invite to the front, Mr. and

Mrs. Prof. Dr. Pujiono, S.H., M.Hum. Mrs.

Prof. Dr. Harti Ningsih, SH.H., M.Hum.

Mrs. Dr. Aroma Elmina Marta, S.H., M.H.,

and Mr. Ari Wibowo, SH. SH., M.H.

Ladies and gentlemen, respected guests.

The handover of these souvenirs and

mementos is a form of

our gratitude from the Faculty of

Law, Islamic University of Indonesia to

the speakers who have

shared their knowledge at

today's national seminar.

[laughs]

Okay, next one. We would like to ask for your

willingness to take a photo

together first.

Standing or being taught

standing. Ladies and

gentlemen, we ask you

to stand up first.

We would like to express our gratitude. we

invite you.

Please, sir. Could you please stand up first,

please? Can

you see it?

Looking for clothes

[laughs]

Mr. Sarif.

Okay. Sat dua ti.

One two t

Oh, okay. S.

We would like to thank you, ladies and

gentlemen.

Okay, ladies and gentlemen, we

respect you. Now we arrive at the core of the

event, namely the national seminar which will

thoroughly examine the paradigm of the

criminal system in the National Criminal Code.

This seminar session will be guided by an

extraordinary moderator, namely

Mr. Ari Wibowo, SH., S.H., M.H. For

that, to Mr. Ari Wibowo, SH. SH.H.,

M.H. you're welcome.

And let's give a

big round of applause to our moderator Mr. Ari

Wibowo. Thank You.

Nggih, thank you Mr. Kajur.

Asalamualaikum warahmatullahi

wabarakatuh.

Good morning all. Dear Head of the

Faculty of Law, UI,

respected speakers, Prof. Pujiono,

Prof. Harti Winingsih, Mrs. Dr. Aroma

Elminta, lecturers, and

all the happy guests.

This morning we will discuss one part

of the national Criminal Code which will come into effect

on January 2, 2026. If we

talk about criminal law, there are at least

three major parts. The first is related

to the aspect of criminal acts, the

second is criminal responsibility, the

third is midwifery. It is impossible for

us to discuss everything in a short time

. Of course we have to

choose and we will discuss the

last aspect, namely criminalization,

where there are quite significant changes

from the Criminal Code to the national Criminal Code. For this reason,

we will listen to presentations

from highly

competent speakers. Please come up to the

stage to Prof. Pujiono, S.H.,

M.Hum. He is a professor at the Faculty of

Law, Diponegoro University, Semarang.

To Prof. Pujiono, I invite you.

You can choose right or left.

[applause]

Second, Prof. Hartih, SH.H., M.Hum.

He is a professor from the Faculty of

Law, 11 Maret University, Surakarta

and also my promoter. Just

hearing his name makes me

nervous because I remember my

unfinished dissertation. Please P. Prof. Harti

Wirengsih to be able to go up on

stage. We give

him applause. [applause]

And this last one is already very

popular in the UI Faculty of Law. She

is Mrs. Dr. Aroma Elmina Marta, S.H.,

M.H. who, God willing, will soon

become a professor. To Mrs.

Dr. Aroma I invite you to come up on

stage.

[applause]

Yes, for the first material, it will be

delivered by Prof. Pujiono, SH.H.,

M.Hum. He is one of the members

of the drafting team for the Criminal Code Bill, so he

understands the contents of the national Criminal Code very well.

He will explain the

changes in the concept of punishment from the Criminal Code to the

National Criminal Code, which are

quite significant changes. Starting from the

death penalty, then the prison sentence which is

very minimal to be imposed

and so on. He will

convey this along with the philosophical basis

for changes to the concept of punishment in the

national Criminal Code. Go straight to

Prof. Pujiono has about 30 minutes

to deliver the material.

I invited him.

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. Asalamualaikum

warahmatullahi wabarakatuh.

Peace be upon you. Good morning and best wishes

to all of us. Om

swastiastu. Namo buddhaya.

Good wishes to all of us. Respected

Dean, represented by the

Criminal Division, the

structures at the Faculty of Law, UII, and the

resource persons, ProfIN, Mrs.

Aroma, and of course

all the happy students who are present on

this occasion. Ee first of all

I would like to thank you for your

invitation this time. This

is the

third series of my trip

from Semarang to Jakarta Pontianak

and on this occasion we can

discuss together

regarding the national KUAP and this is the new era of the

Criminal Code. So we talked a lot

about KUP. Hey, all of

you. If we talk

about the new KUP,

there are many things we can discuss later, of course

. Because the new KB is a

K that we created which is based

on aspects related to

our national value system. So there are

some paradigmatic changes that are

very different from the old EE KUAP

or WVS. Specifically for myself, I was asked

to speak regarding the

renewal of criminal sanctions in the

national KUAP.

If we talk about

ee sanctions, of course there are

developments, not only criminal sanctions,

in the context of national family planning.

So, in the context of enforcing

criminal law, we use not only

criminal sanctions but also sanctions in the form of

actions, so it is often called a

double track system. EE is differentiated

in relation to the use of sanctions and

actions, both for people in

this context, adults and also for

children. In addition, ee also

introduced new things related

to the subject of

corporate corpo which will be discussed later by Prof. there will be

many things discussed by him. So,

what

was actually outside the Criminal Code was

then included

in our first book in the context of updating the national KUP. So when

we talk about subjects and

responsibilities, it is not only about

humans in the context of natural persons,

but also in this case it is

related to corpo, corporations.

Ee okay,

I will try to start first from

why then ee there is a need for

ee renewal related to ee

criminal and criminal penalties. The

moderator has already stated that if we

talk in the context of updating the

basic idea in our national Criminal Code

that has been updated, it is in the context of three

main issues of criminal law and

we can see this in the systematics

or structure of our national Criminal Code

. So, brothers and sisters, if we

talk about the systematics or structure of the

national kaban, we can see that

it is arranged based on three things.

The first is arranged based on the

sequence of three main issues in

criminal law. So then,

we can see that in the systematics, in

book 1, chapter 2, in the first part, it

specifically talks about criminal acts.

The second one, ee, in the second part of

chapter 2 of book 1, it talks about

criminal responsibility. And the

third one is in chapter 3 in book

1 which talks about crimes and punishment.

What we are discussing on this occasion

is related to the

main problem. Thirdly, the

systematics of KUAP, apart from being arranged

based on the sequence of three

main issues of criminal law, are also

arranged based on the

dualistic approach, where if we

look at the first part of EE book 1 chapter 2

and the second part,

we can see that there is actually a separation

between matters related to

criminal acts and

criminal responsibility. The question then is in the

third part which is related to the

basic idea of ​​its composition, which is to base it on the

idea of ​​balance. So our criminal law

does not only talk about

actions, but also

concerns the problem of people. So

our criminal law is included as part of

modern criminal law, in which we

talk about the criminal law. not

only then talk about the aspect of

the action orientation on the action,

but also on the aspect of people. In

this case it is related to

criminal responsibility. Therefore,

in this discussion, we will

see according to the material that

was given to me to

see how the

criminal sanctions system develops, the

sanctions that are in the National Criminal Code

. Good. Eh, the basic idea of

reform, if we look at it, we can

see a change in the concept of punishment

from a retributive, lek talionis concept which is

no longer suitable in the context of

Indonesian punishment and we are moving towards an

orientation. There we learn about

rehabilitation, re-education and also things

related to physical restoration.

This view that prioritizes imprisonment has been greatly

avoided, reduced, yes. we can

see that in the context of the formulation

as well. So, if you

all try to conduct a study

in the KUP WPS from Profarda's dissertation,

eh, we will find that at least

98%,

eh, 89%,

of the sanctions available in the K

WPS are criminal sanctions in the form of

imprisonment. So then we can

see that we can be sure that

every time law enforcement and

criminalization occurs, the orientation is to impose

sanctions in the form of

imprisonment. So it is no surprise that

we can see that what has been happening

is that there is overcoding

in correctional institutions. Well,

then in a context like this, the

criminal sanction of imprisonment is no

longer the prima donna, but is

also placed as the ultimum rem

remedium. This is one eh eh

new idea that is related to the

issue of existence rather than

imprisonment. And what is very interesting

then is that in

our criminal sanctions system, we only see

in Article 10 starting from the

death penalty, imprisonment, detention,

detention, and fines

there. Then, in the new KP,

there is a diversification of criminal sanctions.

There are other alternatives to the

freedom of judges in the context of the

elasticity of their jurisdiction to

apply ee other than

imprisonment. And strangely, if you

all try to see, you

will see that in the formulation of the

crime which is then threatened with a

prison sentence, it can then be

substituted with another criminal sanction

. Although in our national KUAP, the

criminal sanctions listed

are three, namely

imprisonment, fines, and

then the death penalty. However, in the

implementation of

criminal penalties, it is possible that

supervision,

community service, fines, or

detention may be imposed as a substitute for

imprisonment. This is an

extraordinary development in the paradigm of criminal justice related to the

application of criminal sanctions. So

the hope is that when we talk

about criminal policy, the

orientation is once again not with

imprisonment. This is the

next orientation.

Ee okay ee I'll continue.

If we talk about the

issue of criminalization, ladies and

gentlemen, there are some very

new thoughts that

will make

very significant changes to

our concept of midwifery. So, up

to now, in the Criminal Code for WPS, we have

only known about criminal provisions.

For those who commit attempted crimes, the

sentence is reduced by one third and

so on. It is related to the

rules. But then ee in the

context of how to get a

punishment that ee contains an aspect of

flexibility

which can then reflect in the

context of ee justice and legal certainty.

So in the new anti-KUAP criminal policy, the

aim of

criminal punishment is stated and it is also

stated in the context of the

criminal policy that the orientation of the criminal punishment

is to obtain a finding in

this case, which is certainty of

justice. And in Article 54 paragraph

2 it is expressly stated that when there is a

conflict between justice and

certainty, what must be prioritized

is the issue of justice.

We can see all of this because

there are guidelines for sentencing and

also those related to the

purpose of sentencing. So, with

the existence of regulated criminal purposes and guidelines

, explicitly stated

in our national Criminal Procedure Code,

this provides elasticity,

provides justification in

criminal sentencing for judges in

imposing such criminal sentences. Whether it is

related to

the type of strapsut, the weight of the strapmat

or the method of carrying out the crime. And it's

very flexible, yes. This is

a very extraordinary progress and

how can we then

leave the context of ee

midwifery. So, if we talk

about guidelines for midwifery, in essence,

it is actually guidance

related to the

issue of the principle of individualization of punishment,

namely that punishment must be appropriate to the

perpetrator. So, if we often

say that there is a disparity in sentencing,

disparity in sentencing is an

inevitability. but that there must be

justification for it. Then the presence of

sentencing guidelines and also

the inclusion of the purpose of sentencing

can be a guidance in the

sentencing itself. Especially if

we see that we are talking about the

theory of the

two-phase process, the two-phase process, we

can see that in essence,

in the criminal process, in the

court process, there are two stages. The

legal technical stage and the stage of giving

criminal pid. ee the inclusion of the purpose of

punishment and guidelines for punishment is

more useful then in the

context related to ee

how to provide guidance in ee

midwifery. Next, regarding the reasons for

increasing criminal penalties. Because criminal law

does not only look at actions but

also looks at people. So then

we talk about things

related to the existence of

aggravating and mitigating reasons for the sentence,

looking at it in the context of the person or the

double track system, yes. I

said earlier that we do not only see

sanctions as criminal sanctions but also

sanctions for actions that are explicitly stated

in our criminal sanctions system

.

This type of crime and action is also

included in the

EE issue which is related to the

issue of sanctions regulations.

These justification and forgiveness reasons are clearly

separated because we adhere to the concept of

structured understanding which

concerns the dualistic ee school.

Then we can see that the

justification and the excuse are

separated. the consequence is that the

justification reasons are in book 1 chapter 2

part one about criminal acts,

while the reasons for forgiveness are in the

second part. Then, one

more thing, if we talk about

criminal penalties and punishment in the National Criminal Procedure Code,

we recognize that there is a categorization

of those who commit crimes, right? This will

create a

different consequence, yes, related not only to the

type of ee, the severity of the ee

midwifery, but also related

to the entire criminal sanction system.

Then later we will find that

there are criminal sanctions for adults

and for children.

So later we will talk about

corporations and also related to the different

sanctions that will be imposed

.

Hey, brothers and sisters,

in our national Criminal Code, it is

stated explicitly as

justification

as a direction of orientation related

to criminal punishment.

This is stated in Article 51 and is

not included in the BBS Criminal Code.

So later in the context of the judge's

sentencing policy, the judge can see the

actual orientation of the purpose of the

sentencing. So, based on

Article 51, we can identify several

things related to the purpose of

criminal punishment, namely preventing

criminal acts by enforcing

legal norms with the protection and guidance of

society. E in the existing context is

indeed the ee that we apply.

socialize convicts by providing

guidance and mentoring to make them

good and useful people. It is an

implementation of the resocialization system.

And the third one is related to the

very

broad implications that will be related to how

the criminal case can be resolved.

Is it then only in

courtrooms through in-

settlement or can it be resolved

outside the court through an out-of-

settlement mechanism? That is because ee in the

orientation of midwifery is the

resolution of applause conflicts

that arise as a result of criminal acts,

restoring balance and

bringing a sense of peace and security in the

context of this community and

its relationship. Then how do we

actualize in the context of ee

sanctions related to

customary crimes, related to witnessing

conflicts, Ladies and Gentlemen, this is

accommodated in the context of resolving

criminal cases regulated in

our national Criminal Code.

Yes. So later in the settlement of

criminal cases it will not always be like that,

yes, through one door in the contact

in of settlement but can also be

resolved when there is a

conflict resolution, yes, outside the

court, it is resolved through an

out of settlement mechanism and it is

accommodated in legal politics which is

clearly regulated in the national KUP

in article 132 paragraph 1 letter G

where it is emphasized there that

the settlement of criminal cases outside the KUHB

can be used as a reason for the elimination of the

authority to prosecute, this has

a very big implication

even though in practice

it has been done, yes, in this case,

both in the context of the

RJ settlement carried out by the

police with their police chief regulation or

which was carried out by the prosecutor's office with

the 2020 Perjaun. But what is clear is that

the resolution of criminal cases

does not always have to be done in the

courtroom, but can be

resolved outside the court.

foster a sense of regret and

free the

convict from guilt. These are some of the contexts

that

we must then pay attention to. Ladies and gentlemen, it is

very interesting then regarding the

new issue that is included in

our national Criminal Code, namely

regarding the guidelines for sentencing, which

later we will get one in

the phenomenon of sentencing where if the

current criminal formula is when there is an actus

reus, there is mensrea, there is no justification for

forgiveness, then the formula must be

criminalized. Well, in our National Criminal Code

, we are given

flexibility.

Flexibility is

based on guidelines, not on what

people like. So far,

perhaps it's because it's not transparent,

there are transactions and so on.

But in the National Criminal Procedure Code, it is

possible for a person to be

proven to have committed a crime and be

guilty of the act committed.

But it can be forgiven without being punished.

But it is based on a

justification based on correct thinking

and is regulated in

law. We can see that later

in the provisions of Article 54 paragraph 2.

There, ee, if we talk about

sentencing guidelines, this is an

obligation for judges. Well, this is really

extraordinary, ladies and gentlemen. Later there will be

transparency in the

judge's sentencing policy in the context of

determining the sentence. Do you

then want to be punished or

freed or forgiven? when

convicted, what punishment should be

imposed in terms of the straf

shoot aspect, the strap mat, and the strap

modus, all of which can be traced

from the basis of considerations

that can be seen in how

far the judge

explores the guidelines for

sentencing and these sentencing guidelines are

very explicit not only for

individuals but also for corporate bodies.

So transparency is very

important in this case because it

will be reflected in the

judge's considerations in the

aspect of his sentencing policy.

So, I mentioned earlier that when we

talk about the criminal examination process

in court, it actually

goes through two stages. The function of the process is the

technical legal stage, how

then in the legal process is it

proven that the defendant's actions are

in accordance with what was alleged by

the prosecutor, that the perpetrator is guilty of the

actions committed. Point. There

then the final ee is talking

about what is related to the

legal technical examination. But

then we entered the second stage,

which seemed as if

no guidance was given, no

guidance, no guidelines,

it was left entirely to the judge to

determine whether I would be punished,

how much the penalty would be, what type of sanction, and

how it would be implemented

in practice. Then we

can see that there are

superficial considerations

that are subjective in nature, which

do not delve into the complete aspects of

both the side of the act and the side of the

perpetrator. The judge often said

that the defendant was still young, polite to

the president, [laughs]

admitted that it was not complicated, right? That's the

standard, right? But with

developments in new pendant patterns

, these guidelines should appear later

in the team's considerations. So

then, if it is said that the

judge's decision is the crown of the

judge's work, we will be able to see

the ideals of justice and the correct basis of argument

in the sentencing process.

It is the judge's obligation. So in

several discussions that then arose because

this was related to the issue of the

application of the criminal sanction system, whether this

also ee then became guidance, a

guideline for prosecutors in the

context of ee carrying out prosecutions.

Well, this is one ee what ee

one challenge

in itself. Because this is listed

and becomes a guide and there is a

criminal purpose. This should also be

an obligation that must be carried out by the

prosecutor. These are some of my discussions

with colleagues in the prosecutor's office and with the

Attorney General's Office. There must be changes

in the context of prosecution in the

prosecutor's office.

ee article 54 paragraph 1 and paragraph 2

relate to guidelines which are

factors that must be considered

by judges. Guidelines for not

imposing prison sentences, imprisonment.

Later, ladies and gentlemen, we can

see that there is a provision in Article 70,

where Article 70 in paragraph 1

provides a guideline

that with the considerations

in Article 70 paragraph 1, as far as

possible, imprisonment will not be

imposed unless later what

is in paragraph 2 paragraph 2 is

an exception from paragraph 1

which then appears in connection

with the

renewal in our place, namely

judicial forgiveness which is often

referred to as judicial parden

or rehtelek parden. This is very

interesting, ladies and gentlemen, when I was

asked by the Supreme Court at

Badilum at that time to specifically discuss the

matter of this judge's forgiveness.

It turns out that the judges also did not

understand and why would they

regulate judicial forgiveness if there was already a

reason for forgiveness. This means that

in fact one cannot understand in the

context of what the judge's forgiveness is

and what the reason for forgiveness is. So,

if we talk about judicial

parden, the context is that if

the criminal formula is an actus and

menstreal, there is no excuse and

no justification, the formula

must be criminalized. In a context like

this, considering the guidelines

in article 54 paragraph 2

makes it possible to

forgive. So in this case,

criminal law has the spirit of perma-forgiveness. If all

this time based on KBS, there is

no forgiveness for you. [laughs]

That's really cruel. When a

traffic accident is a disaster.

Then how the victim regretted being

so kind to the

victim's family, the perpetrator had already

apologized and accepted. It may even be that

because they showed great empathy they were

accepted by the victims and

became brothers. But our criminal law

says no. Actus rius and

minria exist then it must be punished.

So the Dutch face was a cruel face, a

face of revenge.

So there's no forgiveness for you. But there are

also many people who then

say sorry, ee, that judge

has not been given that authority, there are many

transactions,

let alone if he is given authority like

this. But ladies and gentlemen, we don't need to

think badly about it

because we have to be

responsible for it. he must

then express, explain,

base on orientation on the objectives of

sentencing and sentencing guidelines.

Yes, this is a very fundamental change.

So far, in the context of

criminal law enforcement in its field

, the orientation of its field policy has been

to seek

legal certainty. So many aspects

related to ee concerning ee justice are

not accommodated. There are many

small cases, for example, the

case of Grandma Minah, which actually,

in the context of public legal awareness,

do not need to

enter the realm of the courts. But

because we base it on

formal criteria, the crime is what is

called against the law according to

the law. Grandma Min's actions

can be proven 100% serious and

the ministry exists, so she must be

punished. But here, there is

room, there is room for flexibility to

not criminalize or then, well, like that.

There are spaces to eliminate it,

not having to talk about prison, not having to

talk about criminal proceedings, that are provided in the

context of

our criminal law reform. If we look

at the provisions of Article 132,

the return relates to the reasons for

the removal of the authority to prosecute. where

in article 132 paragraph 1 in letter E there

is a flexibility

in punishment

relating to ee ee the perpetrator of a

crime which is threatened with ee

category 3 fine voluntarily

yes voluntarily ee the perpetrator then

pays category 4 with the

approval of the prosecutor so yes with the

approval of the prosecutor then the prosecution can be abolished

. The question then is

why this prosecutor is related to what is

often referred to as the principle of

dominus litis and this is

extraordinary and this has become a

dispute, if I may say a

heated battle yesterday in the

drafting of the RKUHub, there was actually a

clash between maintaining

the concept of functional differentiation and

how the

principle of dominus li litis was then brought up. So this is

really interesting actually. But

who won? Who lost? Later

we will look at the laws and

regulations. There

shouldn't be a winner or a loser, but the

winner is the Indonesian people

who succeeded in making ee GUHAub. Okay,

I'll continue.

Well, this is what I have already explained

earlier that in the

quotation marks of the second stage in

giving a sentence, the judge is obliged

to consider

in his sentencing there are

guidelines in Article 54 paragraph 1.

He saw the form of the perpetrator's mistake,

motive, and so on, yes. There are many things

that the judge will then consider

in determining

his sentencing policy, until we

finally decide whether I will impose a

prison sentence or whether I will

substitute it. So, there is one

good development in legal politics

in the national KUAP, namely that for

criminal acts that are threatened with a

maximum prison sentence of 5 years or less than 5

years, it is possible to substitute it

with supervision,

fines, detention, or

community service. So it's very flexible

. Does it have to be like-for-like

or not? Yes, first pay attention to

the considerations contained in Article

54 paragraph 1. Article 54 paragraph 1 is

not something that is limitative,

but this can then be developed by

the judge himself to explore. Well,

this becomes one ee question then

in ee relation to law.

the event is related to the context of

procedural law. So,

in the context of the criminal justice system's SPP

, what investigators

actually do is only

present raw materials related

to evidence, witnesses and so on

. But then with the existence of the

midwifery guidelines, it should also be

in how the judge will later

determine the policy of

sentencing the child,

information related to the

problem is not only evidence and

some of the above but also regarding

who the perpetrator is, how he

actually did it, which should be reflected

in what is in Article 54

paragraph 1. So this enters into a certain

realm. Then there are other institutions that

should provide that. The question

then is whether this is the

responsibility of the

investigator or is it prepared by

BAPAS? If we talk about the

juvenile criminal justice system there, BAPAS is the one who

conducts community service in the RPP which

we have just finalized and because the RPP is about

criminal and midwifery which has a

lot of material, then yesterday the

second discussion still left

several articles and the hope is that

before the 2nd of the RP it will be available

and that ee later ee the context is

related to BAPAS BAL

Correctional which then increasingly ee

both for juvenile crimes and

general crimes like this to

fulfill the context related to the

issue of ee this sentencing guidelines

, then there needs to be community service

made by BAP as the mechanism is

regulated later in this ee PP

. I've already discussed the judge's forgiveness earlier

. Also, the

categories of crimes and actions are very

varied and different. Because

we know that there

are two or three

subjects who must be subject to sanctions and

there are different contexts of midwifery policies

. The context of the subject of a natural

person is divided into

adults and children and

the context is that there are corporate bodies. Later,

Profin will discuss this in more detail

. Then earlier ee

was discussed in relation to

ee diversification of development of types of

criminal ee. So we can see B

at the same time that ee in the context of ee

this type of crime ee is grouped

into three things. Previously, in

Article 10, there were 2, main penalties and

additional penalties. In this national KUAP,

one special crime has been added

. If we refer to Article 64 and

Article 67, we can see that what is

meant by

this special type of punishment is the death penalty. This

polemic that is currently developing is

whether the death penalty can still be applied

or the context then is that

all criminal penalties must be conditional death penalties

. Well, this is an internal

debate and then we at the

ninth point that we still admit that

if we read it

systematically, regarding

criminal sanctions, we still admit that the

death penalty, direct execution,

can be imposed, conditional death penalty

must fulfill conditions A and B as

stated in Article 100 paragraph one. But I

don't know, it seems like yesterday

I smuggled this provision, Ma'am. So,

wow, when it was about to be enacted, there were

maneuvers that [laughs]

we ourselves didn't do. Yes, where e

according to article 6 ee 13 it will

mandate that there will be a law

regarding adjustments, but in it it is

smuggled in quotation marks that it

contains changes.

So maybe there will be a lot of DJRs later, maybe that's what's

included in it, it's

as if the legal policy is that

every sentence imposed is a

death sentence with parole. This will

become a polemic later because up until now, the ones

who have been stubbornly refusing it are me

and Prof. Indrianto Senoanji ngih.

So I don't know how it will develop later

.

Ee evasion of imprisonment.

I have already stated that there are

limitations on how to

avoid applying prison sentences,

we can see this in the provisions of

Article 7 70.

The exception is in Article 70

paragraph 2. We can see this later because

the time is not possible,

we can discuss it further.

in the ee session of the closing discussion pinat.

Well,

actually, if we look at the

history of the historical approach,

this is only ee for certain cases,

actually, the criminal cover-up is

related to ee people who

commit crimes motivated

by respectable intentions. In

history, this is related to the

context of how the finding fathers,

our finding fathers, the founders of

this nation who have made great contributions to the

nation. But then because of the

difference in political affiliation,

it was deemed that he had committed a crime.

Then in legal politics it is

not appropriate then if

a prison sentence is imposed then a

prison sentence is imposed. The question

then arises when this is then

re-actualized in the

national KUAP, the question is when

the considerations are driven by

respectable intentions and

oriented towards political issues

such as those at that time? The question is whether

ee articles like this are still current or whether the

ee that is meant by

being motivated by an intention that deserves

respect is not only then

related to

political issues which are not in the context of the

history of its initial appearance.

Yesterday I asked you for your guidance

to try to criticize this

and if possible, then

driven by

this respectable intention, it can be expanded

not only to purely

political issues.

Alternative to imprisonment.

I have already stated that imprisonment can be

substituted with

supervision,

community service, detention, or a

fine.

fine yeah. This and the social work sentence,

later we can see the

supervision sentence, the

death penalty, yes, this is very crucial, it will be

very interesting if we want to discuss it

in relation to the death penalty,

especially in relation to the

conditional death penalty in the

fine category. So, in Article 79,

we no longer find that in the formulation of the

offense we find that the sanctions are related to the

nominal amount, but rather the

category, and this has an impact on

changes, which of course, ee, how

laws outside the Criminal Code must be

adjusted.

Guidelines for imposing fines are also

regulated here in relation to actions

for adults. So, ladies and gentlemen

, I mentioned earlier that we are

not only prioritizing criminal sanctions,

but also sanctions in the form of actions, and

there, explicitly, what are

called sanctions in the form of actions, are also

explicitly formulated in the

law.

What forms will there be, yes,

these are criminal sanctions for children.

We can see later, okay? So there are

starting from criminal warnings and

so on. Okay, later

Mrs. Aroma will discuss the actions for children.

This also exists.

And what is interesting about this child is that

in Article 41 it is

regulated regarding the limits of

criminal responsibility for children.

So, we have known that ee is

in the juvenile criminal justice system and the

limit of criminal responsibility for children

is under 12 years old.

Why then do we choose under 12

years? Well, this is based on ee one

reasoning from ee other science in

this context is psycho psychology.

Although then if we talk

in the context of comparison in various

countries there are also differences of

up to 14 or even 16

[laughs] if we use a

comparative approach we will see there.

Then there will be criminal fines for corporations later,

eh Prof. ing will ee more detail ee

to discuss that including ee

additional criminal penalties for corporations yes.

Well, what about it in relation to

financing policies for corporations? What

things should be considered?

So then we can see the

provisions of Article 56,

yes. I think that's enough. ee from me

as a discussion starter so ngih.

And I apologize, moderator,

perhaps it is more than 4 minutes after the

warning that was given.

I return my thanks to the moderator.

Peace be upon you and Allah be upon you

.

Applause for Prof. Fujiono.

Thank you very much Prof. for his

very comprehensive presentation. It's

understandable if the time is a little late

because if it's not

delivered comprehensively, it feels like there might still be something that's

bothering you, Prof.

Thank you very much for your presentation.

There are many students queuing

outside wanting to enter, so some of them

will take turns with the students

outside. Hey, for the

next session, we will start in 10 minutes

because we are giving

the audience the opportunity to have a cafe break

first. Please feel free to take snacks and

drinks outside and

come back into the room in 10 minutes. Okay,

go ahead.

until

[music]

also

[music]

can

[music]

our Muslim [music]

who

also

Yes, the audience is asked to immediately

enter the room because

we will start the next session soon.

Please, participants, please come

into the room immediately because we will

start the second session soon.

The seats in front that are still empty can be

filled first.

Please, those who are still outside,

come inside immediately.

This front is still empty. Can sit in

front here is still empty. Please.

Yes, come on, you can fill in the front part which is still

empty.

Yes, please condition it immediately. It's

okay to use the empty chair at the very front

. It's okay, the one at the

front. It is okay.

Mrs. Ayu might go forward. Mas is reluctant to

sit in front of Mrs. Ayu.

Ayu.

Huh. Mrs. Ayu is in front. Mas doesn't want to

sit in front of Mrs. Ayu. Suul adab later.

[laughs]

Well, that's how it is. Well, I just dared to be

behind Mrs. Ayu. Immediately someone filled in,

Mrs. Ayu. [laughs]

Moreover, Mrs. Ayu's past has

its blessings,

right? Attendees, please fill in the

front course which is still empty. You can go to that

corner. It's

okay if the corners are empty.

Front corners.

Yes, it has been conditioned

. If so, please ask the committee to close the door

. The committee can help

fill the empty seats.

It's empty. It can be empty at the front, it

can be the same as Mrs. Ayu, it can be empty at the

front. The front is okay, the very front.

Oh yes. Are you embarrassed? Would you like to sit next to Ms.

Ayu? Yes, Mrs. Ayu. Beside Mr. Wahyu.

Well that's that then. If so, the door can be

closed.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, we will

continue with the second session. If earlier the

first session was Prof. Fuji has

conveyed the general concept that has

changed in the national Criminal Code, starting from the

double track system of sanctions, namely

actions and punishment, then there is

rehtelah pardon or judicial pardon,

forgiveness by the judge, then there are

several other things that have been

conveyed comprehensively, including

the death penalty as a

special punishment and there is known to be a conditional death penalty

with a certain probation period

. The next one will be

delivered by Prof. Harti Wiiningseh

regarding the concept of

corporate criminalization. Of course, when discussing the concept of

corporate criminalization, it cannot be

separated from the concept of

corporate criminal responsibility.

So far, we have known the subject of

corporate crimes in Criminal Law

outside the Criminal Code. Because the Criminal Code does not recognize

the subject of corporate crimes. But in the

national Criminal Code the subject of the crime has been

expanded. not only people but also

corporations which of course have

different characteristics. Will

be delivered by Prof. Hartiwi Ningseh is the

same as Prof. Praise. There are 30

minutes. I invite you.

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim.

Asalamualaikum

warahmatullahi

wabarakatuh.

Peace be upon you. Yes, good morning and

good luck to all of us.

Dear

moderator, God willing, Mr. Dr. Ari

Wibowo.

Yes Then I respect the

speakers,

Prof. Pujiono, then Mrs. Dr. Aroma.

Then, I respect the

lecturers of the Faculty of Law, Islamic University of

Indonesia and my happy fellow students

. This morning, yes,

I was given the task by

the committee to discuss the

corporate criminalization system in the National Criminal Code

.

Dear Sirs and Madams, Yes,

perhaps I will continue for the

ladies and gentlemen whom I respect, that the

formulation or drafting of

our national Criminal Code is based

on the ideas or idea of ​​balance.

So the principles and ee system of the Criminal Code that

have been compiled are based on or

based on the idea of

balance.

The first is the

monodualistic balance between the interests of

society and individual interests.

Then there is a balance between the idea of

victim protection and the idea of

individualization of crime. Ee then there are

ee there are some of these ee maybe I don't

need to read them all. Ee goes on

to ee the idea of ​​balance.

Maybe earlier there was the principle of no crime

without fault or the principle of culpability

with the principle of legality. Then,

what is related to

this criminal responsibility system is the

idea of ​​balancing

criminal responsibility for humans and the

criminal responsibility system for corporations,

which was previously mentioned by Mr.

Dr. Ari Wibowo. God willing, in

our current laws, in the

Indonesian Criminal Code, we

still inherit the Dutch Criminal Code,

so in our

laws, we have not yet regulated

the existence of sanctions and

criminal liability for

corporations. So just human. Ee, but

in ee special laws that are

spread across various

ee laws and regulations, such as

the environment, then forestry, ee

corruption, ee TPPO and so on, it

has been regulated like that. So, it's spread out and the

settings are

also different. If

identification can be carried out later, the regulations

contained in our special laws

will vary greatly from

one law to

another. So, then

ee why

ee or when ee actually did the

corporate regulations in

Indonesia actually start? So

if we look at the development

of history, maybe

corporate regulations in

Kamenlaw countries started to exist in the

1930s. But

for ee Indonesia

ee started in ee 1955

ee through Emergency Law 755.

Well, we also adopted this law

ee as it is from the

Dutch State Law. So the

Dutch State Law which was made in

1950

ee there regulates corporations

regarding

ee settlement of economic crimes ee was

regulated then adopted by Indonesia

and that was the first time we

regulated ee corporations and

their responsibilities ee in the

Emergency Law of 7 Years '5. ee

then now it has been spread across

various special laws and

currently we already have New Law

number 1 of 2023 and ee we have

regulated the subject of

corporate law. So why is a corporation a

legal subject? Of course, this has been

studied by ee fellow students

in the S1 program, considering that ee ee

it turns out that crimes committed

by corporations have a more devastating

impact on ee what is called

economic losses to the country compared to

crimes committed by

individuals. Well, so

maybe you still remember, ee, a little

flashback to 1933, there was

a researcher, eh Suterland, who

researched about, ee, what were the names of the various

corporations that were developing in America.

Then he presented the results of

his research that it turned out that the

corporations there, ee,

ee, in them, ee, what is it called, ee,

were led by people who

had extraordinary wealth, wore

nice clothes, and it turned out that they

also committed many crimes,

so the concept of white

collar crime was born. And from that moment on, in the

country of Kamenlawu ee,

the existence of ee corporations as

subjects of criminal law who can be held

accountable has been recognized. So

, friends,

currently there are certainly many concepts

and principles or theories that

we have adopted from the state of Kamenlawu to be able to

recognize and apply

corporate criminal liability in

Indonesia.

Well, here, our KUHB concept is

based on the idea of ​​balance.

the balance between the

criminal responsibility of humans is then

juxtaposed with the existence of

criminal responsibility of corporations

through the theory of identification of ee where ee is

seen that currently the

role of corporations or their activities

are like ee of individuals. He

can also do buying and selling,

renting, committing

crimes, and so on. So it is only

natural that this corporation is also

regulated and can be held

criminally responsible. Yeah, maybe the

next one

. Because the theme here is ee

what? about the criminal system. So

I will refer a little to Prof.

Sudarto about what the actual

meaning of criminalization is. Ee here is

said by Prof. Sudarto said that

criminalization is the same as

punishment. So what this means is that

if we relate

ee to criminal cases, it means

punishment or the giving or

imposing of a sentence by a judge.

Maybe this has been mentioned by

Prof. Praise, I don't need to mention it

again regarding the determination of the

objectives and guidelines for sentencing. The

most important thing is that this

provides a philosophical basis, rationality

and also clear

and directed motivation for sentencing.

So, ladies and gentlemen,

my respected student friends, what

should the judge actually consider

when making a decision? Well,

this has also been conveyed by

Profuji regarding the perpetrator,

the level of guilt, then the losses and

impact of the crime, then

regarding the victim, the perpetrator's attitude and

social justice.

These are the factors that the judge must

consider

. Yes, continue. ee when

a judge is facing an ee

event where the legal subject that

ee will be facing is the ee

corporation. So here the factors

that must be considered by the judge

include, firstly, the level of

loss or impact caused.

Well, this of course must be a

consideration for the judge. ee

for example, for example, in

cases of environmental crimes,

for example,

if

the impact of the environmental crime

causes damage

that cannot be

restored, then of course this must also

be considered differently

if the level of loss

or damage to the environment can

still be repaired. Well, this of course

must also be a consideration for the

judge when he or she will impose a

criminal penalty on the corporation.

Then the level of involvement of management

who have functional positions.

So here, the level of involvement of

the management who has

this functional position is ee, the person who is

given the authority to manage,

who is given the authority to

represent, then who supervises and

also who determines policies in

the corporation. Well, if there is

the involvement of people who are

trusted or who have been given

the mandate by the corporation to participate

in this crime, then this

must also be taken into consideration. Whether

it is aggravating or mitigating

must also be used by the judge.

Then the length of time the crime

has been committed. Of course, the judge

must also look at the track record

of a company, for example. So far, for

example, has this corporation been a

clean corporation or a

black corporation that has often

committed crimes like that,

for example, environmental pollution. Well,

this also needs to be found out. So,

if a corporation has been

labeled as such, has been labeled for a long time,

often committing irregularities, then this

must also be a consideration

for the judge to give a

just sanction, of course. So.

Then also the frequency of criminal acts

by corporations is also one

of the considerations. Then there is the involvement of

officials. Well, this is an intervention, ee,

there are people outside the

corporation, ee, to participate in

this crime. This is also a

consideration. Then the values ​​of law and

justice that live in society.

Then the corporation's track record

in conducting business or activities. ee

whether this corporation has been

getting gold or green or

red or black marks so far. Well, this is usually

if ee as an example, for example

in ee environmental crimes, then

ee government through the Ministry of

Environment every year will

ee carry out an assessment of all

e corporations listed on the

capital market and they must participate in

proper activities or ee

company performance rating programs. Well,

here the companies will be

assessed whether they have complied

with the law, whether they have done

that will be assessed. Well, if the value is

indeed black, this means that

this corporation deserves to be given

consideration to things like this.

Then the impact of criminalization on

corporations. Well, this of course must also be taken into

consideration by the judge considering

that this corporation is a

business entity. Of course, behind the

corporation there are workers, especially

if there are a lot of workers. This

means that the judge must be

careful in giving sanctions,

up to the heaviest sanctions,

for example dissolution. Because of course this

will have an impact on

unemployment. If there is unemployment,

there is poverty. If there is

poverty, there is crime. Well,

this must also be

taken into consideration by the judge. Then there is

corporate cooperation in handling

criminal acts. Well, this is also a

consideration for the judge in

giving sanctions.

Well, ladies and gentlemen and fellow

students whom I respect. ee for

ee sanctions because this corporation is a

dead organ ee that does not have

menstrea so of course the sanctions

imposed or given to the

corporation are certainly different from the

sanctions given to human ee

who have a soul and menstrea. Well,

here, if there are sanctions, they will be

under ee for ee sanctions for corporations,

the main criminal penalty is a fine,

of course. Then later there will be additional criminal penalties

and there will be action. Well, the

criminal fine as the main punishment is

regulated in Article 121.

ee here the criminal fine ee for

corporations is imposed at least

category 4. Later we can see what

category 4 is like that. Ee

then in the case of a crime

committed which is threatened with

imprisonment of under 7 years and a

maximum fine for corporations, it is

category 6. Then the

maximum imprisonment of 7 years and the maximum

ee

up to a maximum of 15 years

is category 7 and those threatened with the

death penalty, life imprisonment or a

maximum imprisonment of 20 years

is a fine category 8. So, why ee

here there is the death penalty,

life imprisonment, there is a maximum penalty of 20

years ee this is intended for

humans. Well, this is none other than

through the identification theory

that the

mistakes of the

trusted people or the

administrators within the corporation

can be charged to the corporation. So,

of course,

to measure the length of this sentence, the

benchmark is the sentence given

to the administrators. But for

corporations, of course, they must refer to the

fine category. So, if the management is

threatened with the death penalty or a maximum of

20 years, for example, then the fine for the corporation

is category 8. Now, if the management is threatened with the death penalty or a maximum of 20 years, then the fine for the corporation is category 8.