AbstrakUpaya memberikan perlindungan terhadap Anak yang berhadapan dengan hukum dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak menunjukkan perkembangan yang sangat berarti. Selama ini terhadap anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum, ditangani secara umum seperti orang dewasa. Anak-anak tersebut melewati proses hukum tanpa ada pendampingan bahkan segera dilakukan upaya paksa berupa penangkapan dan penahanan sehingga anak mengalami putus sekolah. Undang-Undang No. 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak meletakkan fondasi perlindungan anak dengan pendekatan Keadilan Restoratif yaitu dalam penyelesaian perkara melibatkan pelaku, korban, keluarga pelaku/ korban dan pihak lain yang terkait untuk bersama-sama mencari penyelesaian yang adil dengan menekankan pemulihan kembali pada keadaan semula dan bukan pembalasan. Keadilan restoratif ini diwujudkan melalui Diversi yaitu pengalihan penyelesaian perkara anak dari proses peradilan pidana ke proses ke luar pengadilan pidana. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa di Jawa Tengah kasus anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum secara umum diselesaikan melalui jalur diversi dan sebagian lainnya diproses menggunakan berdasarkan KUHAP atau jalur pidana. Hal lainnya meskipun sudah menerapkan jalur diversi terhadap anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum namun belum ada keseragaman atau kesamaan model diversi sebagaimana yang diamanatkan di dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak. Abstract Efforts to provide protection against Children in conflict with the law in the Criminal

No abstract

Ultimum remedium is one of the principles contained in Indonesian criminal law which says that criminal law should be made a final effort in the case of law enforcement. However, law enforcement through the criminal justice system is currently still dominated by the positivism mindset, a way of (criminal) law enforcement which is only based on laws and regulations. In many cases, Criminal Law is used as the only way of order. The purpose of this research is to describe the concept of Ultimum remedium in criminal law, criminal law enforcement practices in Indonesia, and criminal law enforcement concepts in the progressive law paradigm. This research used a philosophical approach discussing law enforcement idealism in the future. The data used were the qualitatively analyzed secondary data. The research results showed that the Ultimum remedium principle has not been completely implemented in law enforcement. Consequently, the burden for crime settlements got bigger and made the law enforcers busier. The Ultimum remedium principle is supported by various considering bases or grounds from the constitutional law aspect, political science, criminal law, and humanism consideration or human rights. Law enforcement in Indonesia was viewed as stagnant and discriminative law enforcement. It was illustrated as a spider web that can only trap the weak but will be easily torn by the rich and strong. Factors inhibiting law enforcement in Indonesia include weak political will and political action of the state leaders to make law as the commander. The regulations and laws reflect the political interests of authorities more than those of the society. Thus, criminal law enforcement is greatly necessary for the progressive law paradigm. Progressivity is greatly required in law enforcement. Progressive law departs from the humanistic perspective. Thinking progressively means having the courage to get out from the law absolutism thinking mainstream and positioning law in the relative position located in the entire humanistic problems.

The tricky part of the investigation process in Indonesian Criminal Justice System is to balance the requirement to successfully uncover cases reported by the public while at the same time avoiding a violation of Human Rights at all cost. To do their duty, the police as investigators are given the authority to take measures such as arrest, detention, search, seizure and examination of letters. In implementing these forceful measures, the tendency of abuse to occur is highly likely, including but not limited on the use of violence to intimidate, evidence engineering, false arrests, maladministration, and other forms of human rights violation. Some of the stages within the investigation process that often use violence as a means to an end are during arresting, interrogating, investigating, and giving detention to suspects. The form of violence in use includes physical and psychological ones, with one of the most extreme examples involving the use of automatic weapon to inflict pain.This study is a result of an empirical research into the use of violence in Indonesian police investigation. We use primary and secondary data sources, including laws, literature, and doctrine, before analyzing the data qualitatively. This research is expected to contribute in further strengthening the principle of Due Process of Law in the implementation of the police investigation process. Even though the principle of Due Process of Law is well known in the Law on Criminal Proceedings of Indonesia, its application is still considered as weak. It is the contention of this paper that the principle of Due Process of Law should be included in the Police Chief Regulation and the regulations within the Code of Police.

Eradication of corruption requires cooperation between state institutions. The weakness of criminal law settlement does not return state losses. There is a Cooperation Agreement between the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Indonesian National Police (Polri), and the Prosecutor's Office regarding the handling of public reports on allegations of corruption in local governments. The purpose of this study is to analyze the handling of corruption cases based on positive Indonesian law and the obstacles faced by law enforcement officers in implementing the cooperation agreement between the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Prosecutor's Office, and the National Police against Article 4 of the Corruption Eradication Act. The approach used in this research is the legal approach. This research data collection technique was carried out through conventional literature searches and online. The data analysis technique used in this study is qualitative because the data is presented in a narrative-descriptive manner. The results of the study indicate that law enforcement for criminal acts of corruption is carried out by the Corruption Eradication Commission based on the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 30 of 2002. The Indonesian National Police based on the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 of 2002 and the Criminal Procedure Code has the authority to conduct investigations and investigations in special criminal cases. corruption. The Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 16 of 2004 has explicitly stated that the Prosecutor's Office has the authority to investigate criminal acts of corruption. The authority to adjudicate cases of criminal acts of corruption is regulated in the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 46 of 2009. The Cooperation Agreement between the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Police, and the Prosecutor's Office hampers the law enforcement process carried out by the Police and the Prosecutor's Office in processing suspected perpetrators of corruption. Every report of corruption from the public is not immediately followed up by the Police and the Prosecutor's Office as law enforcement officers. The case was first examined by the government's internal supervisory apparatus. With the cooperation agreement, law enforcement officers cannot follow up on reports and evidence.