Trafficking in persons is a modern form of human slavery (Modern Day Slavery) and is one of the worst forms of treatment for violations of human dignity. In this study, the type of research used is normative juridical research with a law approach and a concept approach. From the results of the study, it can be concluded that the use of criminal law regarding corporate criminal liability in the crime of trafficking in persons with a transnational dimension at Unit IV Sub-Directorate III of the Directorate of General Crimes of the Criminal Investigation Unit of the Police is to harmonize the legal arrangements for the criminal act of trafficking in persons charged by the public prosecutor that there are in Article 10 of Law Number 21 of 2007 concerning the Eradication of the Crime of Trafficking in Persons with the theory put forward by experts related to the elements of criminal liability and the model of corporate criminal liability. The implementation of corporate criminal responsibility in law enforcement of the criminal act of trafficking in persons with an effective transnational dimension is one whose solution prioritizes the concept of restorative justice. The concept of restorative justice is the concept of resolving a particular crime that involves all interested parties to jointly seek a solution and at the same time find a solution in dealing with events after the crime has arisen and how to overcome its implications in the future.

The implementation of restorative justice (restorative justice) in the handling of corruption in the Covid-19 aid fund contained in Decision Number 8/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2021/PN.Jkt.Pst with the Defendant Harry Van Sidabukke, it can be seen that the panel of judges did not apply the concept of restorative justice. Because in its order, the Panel of Judges instead imposed a prison sentence of 4 (four) years on the Defendant. This means that the sanctions imposed by the judge still adopt the concept of retributive justice which focuses more on retaliation. The retaliation is manifested in the form of sentencing the Defendant. In addition, regarding the implementation of restorative justice in handling corruption cases of Covid-19 aid funds that need to be developed in Indonesian law enforcement, it is related to the provision of sanctions for the Defendant to focus more on recovering losses to state finances instead of focusing on retaliation. That is, in this case the application of the concept of restorative justice needs to be considered by the Panel of Judges so that the return of state losses becomes the main crime, not an additional crime. Because in the context of law enforcement in Indonesia, the restorative justice approach for corruption cases, both small-scale corruption and those that cause harm to state finances, has so far not been implemented. This is because the legal basis for the application of restorative justice for corruption cases in the internal prosecutor's office is not sufficient. This is because the current Attorney General's Regulation does not regulate corruption as a case that can be resolved through restorative justice.

The practice of thuggery carried out by corporations is often found in the loan repayment process. This had resulted in the mushrooming of debt collector businesses, which generally employed high-profile ex-convicts who were used as collateral to intimidate other parties. In this study, the type of research used is normative juridical research using a law approach and a case approach. From the results of the study, it can be concluded that the enforcement of corporate criminal law against thuggery activities in the four cases studied by the authors was carried out by applying a penal policy (repressive effort). Repressive efforts were made against the Defendants by making arrests and then examining them for questioning for their actions. However, because the actions of the Defendants have deeply disturbed the public, especially the container trailer truck drivers, especially the actions of the Defendants are also contrary to the applicable regulations, the Public Prosecutor submits the Defendants to trial for later examination and trial by the Panel of Judges in the fairest way possible. The application of corporate criminal responsibility to thuggery, in this case the Panel of Judges sentenced the Defendants who were involved in one unit to PT. Tanjung Raya Kemilau, meaning, in this case the Panel of Judges applies the first model of the theory of corporate responsibility proposed by Mardjono Reksodiputro, namely "Corporate Management as the maker and the administrator is responsible", while still aligning the theory and the applicable legal rules contained in Article 48, Article 49, Article 50, Article 56, Article 486, Article 487 and Article 595 of the latest Draft Criminal Code. Thus, as one of the law enforcement officers, the panel of judges has carried out their duties in accordance with applicable regulations.

Narcotics crimes are not only committed by adults but also children. For cases of criminal acts committed by children, the restorative justice system at least aims to repair/recover criminal acts committed by children with actions that are beneficial to children. This research is included in normative juridical research. The data used is secondary data. Meanwhile, the collection of legal materials is carried out by reviewing and collecting library materials and the analysis method is carried out using a qualitative descriptive method. From the results of the study, it can be concluded that based on the three decisions that the researchers reviewed, namely Decision Number 28/Pid.Sus-Anak/2020/PN Mre with the Defendant Andesta Bin Rusimin, Decision No.02/Pid.Sus-Anak/2015/PN- SAB with the Defendant Fajri Bin Nurdin and Decision Number 06/Pid.Sus.anak/2017/PN-Bir with the Defendant Child, it can be seen that the concept of restorative justice in handling cases of children as perpetrators of narcotics crimes by the panel of judges was not implemented. This can be seen in his injunction; the Panel of Judges actually sentenced the Defendant to years in prison. Whereas the concept adopted by restorative justice is a concept that prioritizes recovery, not retaliation. The ideal concept of restorative justice in handling cases of children as perpetrators of narcotics crimes is a concept that provides a value of justice for both perpetrators and victims, for this reason it is necessary to reform Law Number 35 of 2009 regarding sanctions for child perpetrators of narcotics crimes by eliminating criminal sanctions. imprisonment is half of the adult sentence. It is necessary to build rehabilitation places that specifically deal with children who are perpetrators of narcotics crimes.

Hakim sering di hadapkan pada dua pilihan yang sulit,  yaitu ketika antara keadilan dengan kepastian hukum tidak dapat dipersatukan dalam sebuah putusan, dua prinsip tersebut idealnya dapat di sandingkan dalam suatu putusan, namun memadukan keadilan dan kepastian hukum dalam kenyataanya tidaklah mudah. Terkadang keadilan dan kepastian hukum berada dalam suatu tempat yang berbeda jika kita hendak mendekati tempat di mana keadilan berada maka kita akan beranjak menjauhi kepastian hukum demikian pula dalam penjatuhan rehabilitasi bagi pecandu penyalahgunaan narkotika, aturan yang ada memberikan pilihan bagi hakim dalam penjatuhan tindakan rehabilitasi sehingga penjatuhan tindakan rehabilitasi dinilai sangat subjektif. Dalam penelitian ini, jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif yaitu suatu jenis penelitian yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau data sekunder. Bahan hukum yang digunakan adalah bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tersier. Teknik pengumpulan bahan hukum dilakukan dengan studi kepustakaan. Teknik analisis bahan-bahan hukum yang menjadi obyek kajian dalam penelitian ini adalah deskriptif dan  normatif.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dalam beberapa putusan pengadilan terdapat beberapa perbedaan dalam mengimplementasikan hukuman rehabilitasi terhadap penyalah guna narkotika.  Kendala implementasi rehabilitasi baik kepada para tersangka atau terdakwa penyalahguna, pecandu dan korban penyalahgunaan, terpulang kepada aparat penegak hukum. Aparat Penegak Hukum mencakup pengertian mengenai institusi penegak hukum dan aparat (orangnya) penegak hukum.