Update Artikelilmiah: 50663

AJENG PRAMESTI

NIM

Judul Artikel

Abstrak (Bhs. Indonesia)

Restitusi yang berlandaskan prinsip restitutio in integrum merupakan mekanisme fundamental dalam paradigma keadilan restoratif. Namun, di Indonesia efektivitas implementasinya terhambat oleh pengajuan restitusi yang bergantung pada inisiatif korban, ketiadaan standarisasi formula perhitungan, lemahnya mekanisme eksekusi, serta ketentuan pidana kurungan pengganti yang secara de facto meniadakan daya paksa. Penelitian ini bertujuan membandingkan pengaturan restitusi di Indonesia dan Amerika Serikat untuk merumuskan alternatif kebijakan yang berkeadilan. Amerika Serikat dipilih sebagai negara pembanding melalui Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) menetapkan restitusi sebagai kewajiban (mandatory) dan didukung oleh mekanisme pendanaan alternatif inovatif. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, perbandingan hukum, kasus, dan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan Indonesia memiliki cakupan kerugian yang lebih holistik dan peran advokasi LPSK, namun lemah pada tahap eksekusi. Sedangkan, Amerika Serikat melalui TVPA menjadikan restitusi wajib, menggunakan formula perhitungan berdasarkan Fair Labor Standards Act, dan memperkuat implementasi dengan mekanisme pembiayaan alternatif seperti asset forfeiture dan Crime Victims Fund. Penelitian ini merekomendasikan adopsi selektif mekanisme restitusi di Amerika Serikat, meliputi: (1) Menjadikan restitusi wajib dalam kasus human trafficking; (2) Penghapusan sanksi pidana kurungan pengganti; (3) Optimalisasi asset forfeiture; dan (4) Perluasan mandat serta cakupan tindak pidana dalam Dana Bantuan Korban. Pembaruan ini diharapkan dapat mentransformasi restitusi dari sekadar hak normatif menjadi instrumen keadilan restoratif yang fungsional bagi pemulihan korban.

Abtrak (Bhs. Inggris)

Restitution based on the principle of restitutio in integrum is a fundamental mechanism in the restorative justice paradigm. However, in Indonesia, its effective implementation is hampered by restitution claims that depend on the initiative of the victim, the absence of standardized calculation formulas, weak enforcement mechanisms, and provisions for substitute imprisonment that effectively negate coercive power. This study aims to compare restitution regulations in Indonesia and the United States to formulate equitable policy alternatives. The United States was chosen as a comparative country through the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), which mandates restitution as a mandatory obligation and is supported by innovative alternative funding mechanisms. The research method used is normative juridical with a legislative, comparative law, case, and conceptual approach. The results show that Indonesia has a more holistic scope of losses and the advocacy role of the Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK), but is weak at the execution stage. Meanwhile, the United States, through the TVPA, makes restitution mandatory, uses a calculation formula based on the Fair Labor Standards Act, and strengthens implementation with alternative financing mechanisms such as asset forfeiture and the Crime Victims Fund. This study recommends the selective adoption of restitution mechanisms in the United States, including: (1) Making restitution mandatory in human trafficking cases; (2) Abolishing substitute imprisonment; (3) Optimizing asset forfeiture; and (4) Expanding the mandate and scope of the Victim Assistance Fund. These reforms are expected to transform restitution from a merely normative right into a functional instrument of restorative justice for victim recovery.

Kata kunci

Pembimbing 1

Pembimbing 2

Pembimbing 3

Tahun

Jumlah Halaman