Improving the quality of law enforcement

Oct 13, 2025 by talynt.org 60 views

State Responsibility for Convicted Child Victims Missed: A Study of Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015

Introduction

The 1945 Constitution of Indonesia guarantees the rights of every child to live, grow, and develop, and be protected from violence and discrimination. This commitment is a testament to the state's dedication to creating quality Indonesian human resources. However, in practice, children sometimes become victims of the legal system's errors, such as wrongful arrests. In this context, the state has a special responsibility to protect and restore the rights of children who are victims of the justice system's errors.

This article analyzes the state's responsibility for convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested, as examined in the Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015. Through a normative and descriptive analytical research approach, this article examines the decision and reveals the form of state responsibility based on criminal procedural law.

State Responsibility Based on Criminal Procedure Law

The Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) regulates two forms of state responsibility for convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested, namely compensation and rehabilitation. Compensation aims to provide compensation for the material and immaterial losses experienced by the child convicted due to law enforcement errors. Rehabilitation, on the other hand, aims to restore the condition of the child convicted to its original state, both physically, mentally, and socially, after experiencing trauma due to the wrong legal process.

The state's responsibility to provide compensation and rehabilitation is a crucial aspect of ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently. By providing compensation, the state acknowledges the harm caused to the child convicted and takes steps to rectify the situation. Similarly, rehabilitation is essential in helping the child convicted to recover from the trauma experienced during the wrongful arrest and subsequent legal process.

Analysis of Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015

Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015 involved four convicted children accused of murder. The decision of the South Jakarta District Court and the DKI Jakarta High Court stated that the convicted child was guilty and convicted based on the evidence obtained through the investigation process. However, in the process of review (PK), the Supreme Court found new facts (novum) which showed that the convicted children were innocent. The Supreme Court then decided to free the four convicts of children.

This decision highlights the importance of the Supreme Court's role in protecting the rights of children, especially in cases of law enforcement errors. The Supreme Court's decision demonstrates that the judicial institution has a critical role in ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently.

Important Lessons from the Supreme Court's Decision

Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/PID.Sus/2015 provides several important lessons related to the state's responsibility for convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested:

The Importance of Law Enforcement that is Just and Balanced

This case shows that law enforcement must be fair and balanced, not only focusing on evidence of errors but also paying attention to the possibility of errors in the investigation process. The Supreme Court's decision emphasizes the need for law enforcement to be thorough and objective in its investigation process.

The Role of the Supreme Court in Protecting the Rights of the Child

The Supreme Court Decision shows the important role of the judicial institution in protecting the rights of children, especially in cases of law enforcement errors. The Supreme Court's decision demonstrates that the judicial institution has a critical role in ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently.

The Importance of Comprehensive Proof

This case emphasizes the importance of comprehensive and objective proof in the judicial process. The Supreme Court's decision highlights the need for law enforcement to gather evidence that is thorough and objective, rather than relying on incomplete or biased information.

The State's Obligation to Provide Rehabilitation

The state has the obligation to provide rehabilitation to the convicted child victims who were caught wrong so that they can return to normal life. This is a crucial aspect of ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently, and that the rights of children are protected.

Conclusion

Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/PID.Sus/2015 is a clear proof of the state's commitment to protect the rights of children and provide justice for those who are victims of the legal system's errors. The state has the responsibility to ensure that the justice system runs fairly and transparently, as well as providing compensation and rehabilitation for the convicted children who were victims of wrongful arrest.

This article is expected to increase understanding of the state's responsibility for convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested and encourage efforts to improve the quality of the justice system in Indonesia, especially in protecting children's rights. By analyzing the Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015, this article provides valuable insights into the state's responsibility for convicted child victims and highlights the importance of ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently.

Recommendations

Based on the analysis of Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015, the following recommendations are made:

Improving the quality of law enforcement: Law enforcement agencies must improve the quality of their investigation process to ensure that evidence is gathered thoroughly and objectively.
Enhancing the role of the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court must continue to play a critical role in protecting the rights of children, especially in cases of law enforcement errors.
Providing compensation and rehabilitation: The state must provide compensation and rehabilitation to convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested to ensure that they can return to normal life.
Strengthening the justice system: The justice system must be strengthened to ensure that it runs fairly and transparently, and that the rights of children are protected.

By implementing these recommendations, the state can ensure that the justice system runs fairly and transparently, and that the rights of children are protected.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about State Responsibility for Convicted Child Victims Missed: A Study of Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015

Q: What is the significance of Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015?

A: Supreme Court Decision No. 131 PK/Pid.Sus/2015 is significant because it highlights the state's responsibility to protect the rights of children who are victims of the justice system's errors. The decision demonstrates that the state has a special responsibility to ensure that the justice system runs fairly and transparently, and that the rights of children are protected.

Q: What are the two forms of state responsibility for convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested?

A: The two forms of state responsibility for convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested are compensation and rehabilitation. Compensation aims to provide compensation for the material and immaterial losses experienced by the child convicted due to law enforcement errors. Rehabilitation, on the other hand, aims to restore the condition of the child convicted to its original state, both physically, mentally, and socially, after experiencing trauma due to the wrong legal process.

Q: What is the importance of law enforcement that is just and balanced?

A: The importance of law enforcement that is just and balanced cannot be overstated. Law enforcement must be fair and balanced, not only focusing on evidence of errors but also paying attention to the possibility of errors in the investigation process. This is essential in ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently, and that the rights of children are protected.

Q: What is the role of the Supreme Court in protecting the rights of the child?

A: The Supreme Court plays a critical role in protecting the rights of children, especially in cases of law enforcement errors. The Supreme Court's decision demonstrates that the judicial institution has a critical role in ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently.

Q: What is the importance of comprehensive proof in the judicial process?

A: Comprehensive proof is essential in the judicial process. The Supreme Court's decision emphasizes the need for law enforcement to gather evidence that is thorough and objective, rather than relying on incomplete or biased information.

Q: What is the state's obligation to provide rehabilitation to convicted child victims who were caught wrong?

A: The state has the obligation to provide rehabilitation to convicted child victims who were caught wrong so that they can return to normal life. This is a crucial aspect of ensuring that the justice system runs fairly and transparently, and that the rights of children are protected.

Q: What are the recommendations for improving the quality of the justice system in Indonesia?

A: The following recommendations are made to improve the quality of the justice system in Indonesia:

Improving the quality of law enforcement: Law enforcement agencies must improve the quality of their investigation process to ensure that evidence is gathered thoroughly and objectively.
Enhancing the role of the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court must continue to play a critical role in protecting the rights of children, especially in cases of law enforcement errors.
Providing compensation and rehabilitation: The state must provide compensation and rehabilitation to convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested to ensure that they can return to normal life.
Strengthening the justice system: The justice system must be strengthened to ensure that it runs fairly and transparently, and that the rights of children are protected.

Q: What is the expected outcome of this article?

A: The expected outcome of this article is to increase understanding of the state's responsibility for convicted child victims who were wrongly arrested and encourage efforts to improve the quality of the justice system in Indonesia, especially in protecting children's rights.