Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2024 provides Indonesian judges with guidelines for applying restorative justice in criminal cases. This article examines how the regulation has shaped adjudication and judicial rulings at the Tarakan District Court and considers its relevance to Law No. 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code. The study used a normative-empirical legal research design with statutory and conceptual approaches. Data were drawn from an interview with a judge at the Tarakan District Court and an analysis of legislation, scholarly articles, books, and institutional documents. The findings show that the regulation gives judges clearer criteria for addressing harm to victims, holding defendants accountable, and restoring social relationships while retaining criminal liability. The judge described a greater role in facilitating dialogue and noted that the application of restorative justice is recorded in the Case Tracking Information System and in court rulings. The judge also linked these practices to the local tradition of deliberation. The study identifies voluntary participation, balanced standing between the parties, victim protection, and coordination among institutions as conditions for effective implementation. The Criminal Procedure Code reinforces this approach by providing for restorative justice across the stages of criminal proceedings. The findings highlight how judges can incorporate restoration and substantive justice into criminal adjudication.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samad et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: