A Substantive Justice-Based Model for Controlling Judicial Discretion in the Application of Judicial Pardon
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38035/gijlss.v4i3.1050Keywords:
Judicial Pardon, Judicial Discretion, Substantive Justice, Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP), SentencingAbstract
This study examines the problem of judicial discretion in the application of judicial pardon under Article 54 paragraph (2) of Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP). Judicial pardon represents a significant reform in the sentencing system, as it allows judges to refrain from imposing criminal sanctions or measures even when the defendant has been proven guilty. However, the formulation of the provision contains broad and open-ended phrases such as “the minor nature of the offense,” “the personal circumstances of the offender,” “justice,” and “humanity,” which may give rise to subjectivity, sentencing disparities, and legal uncertainty if not accompanied by adequate control parameters. This study employs a normative-prescriptive legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and limited comparative approaches. The findings indicate that the application of judicial pardon should be guided by a substantive justice-based model encompassing four control mechanisms: proof of culpability, eligibility for pardon, consideration of the interests of victims and society, and explicit as well as reviewable legal reasoning. This model positions judicial pardon not as an act of subjective leniency, but as a rational, proportional, and accountable judicial mechanism.
References
Griffith, G. (2005). Sentencing guidelines and judicial discretion. NSW Parliamentary Library Research Service.
Indonesia Corruption Watch. (2014). Studi atas disparitas putusan pemidanaan perkara tindak pidana korupsi. Indonesia Corruption Watch.
Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia. (2010). Menemukan substansi dalam keadilan prosedural: Laporan penelitian putusan kasus pidana pengadilan negeri 2009. Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia.
Krisnamurti, H. (2025). Harmonisasi asas permaafan hakim (judicial pardon) dalam hukum positif Indonesia untuk mencapai keadilan yang bermartabat. Jurnal Litigasi, 26(2), 104–134.
Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian hukum. Kencana.
Meliala, N. C. (2020). Rechterlijk pardon (pemaafan hakim): Suatu upaya menuju sistem peradilan pidana dengan paradigma keadilan restoratif. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan, 8(3).
Ningtias, A. D., & Shofa, A. F. (2024). Sinkronasi konsep pemaafan hakim sebagai wujud asas restorative justice dalam hukum acara pidana. Risalah Hukum, 20(1), 33–40.
Nugroho, W. (2012). Disparitas hukuman dalam perkara pidana pencurian dengan pemberatan. Jurnal Yudisial, 5(3), 261–282.
Saputro, A. A. (2016). Konsepsi rechterlijk pardon atau pemaafan hakim dalam rancangan KUHP. Mimbar Hukum, 28(1), 61–76.
Satria, H. (2018). Restorative justice: Paradigma baru peradilan pidana. Jurnal Media Hukum, 25(1), 111–123.
Sentencing Council. (2021). A review of consistency in sentencing. Sentencing Council.
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2015). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat. Rajawali Pers.
Syamsudin, M. (2014). Keadilan prosedural dan substantif dalam putusan sengketa tanah magersari: Kajian putusan Nomor 74/PDT.G/2009/PN.YK. Jurnal Yudisial, 7(1), 18–33.
Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2023 Nomor 1.
Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman, Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2009 Nomor 157.
Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana, Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1981 Nomor 76.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2020). Handbook on restorative justice programmes (2nd ed.). United Nations.
United Nations. (1990). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures: The Tokyo Rules. United Nations.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rianda Prahartiwi, Kadi Sukarna
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright :
Authors who publish their manuscripts in this journal agree to the following conditions:
- Copyright in each article belongs to the author.
- The author acknowledges that the Greenation International Journal of Law and Social Sciences (GIJLSS) has the right to be the first to publish under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (Attribution 4.0 International CC BY 4.0).
- Authors can submit articles separately, arrange the non-exclusive distribution of manuscripts that have been published in this journal to other versions (for example, sent to the author's institutional repository, publication in a book, etc.), by acknowledging that the manuscript has been published for the first time at GIJLSS.
